^-^^ 


r»f  **• 


% 


m 


:^v 


ic! 


C5i^ 


-*C, 


kwawy^ 


^K  Ww, 


^fea,,=--.^x 


^^j^ 


Wu-^.^Ui 


f^:'Vv,wW«««^SS^H;i^U^ 


tibrarjp  of  Che  theological  ^emmarjp 

.      PRINCETON  •  NEW  JERSEY 


•d^n- 


v»  3 


'^^.^ 


^{-•iiiL. 


.-^.:^yy' 


^Oi^ggwyg^^WLe^^yS 


*^:^'  v-/'^: 


mM^ 


^^^•m^^^ 


^^^^Q^M 


'IW^w 


(WVV'-'wC 


fefe«'*i 


iffi*i«^®^i§i8 


.^>^^^> 


.^\J\J^ 


WW'wVj'uv  j\.  A  jWi^A  i'My  ^' 


'^^y^^wwCw:^.^^'^/^^' 


^WML(^ 


'^^.>^ 


w^\^ 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Archive 

in  2011  witii  funding  from 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/historyofchr03scha 


HISTfti^i'I 


OF 


ANCI^fiNT    CHRISTIANITY. 


VOL.  III. 

A.  D.  311-600. 


jxs^  ^f  ^'^^-mb^ 


^'^^^ 


HISTORY 


MOV    10  196: 


CHEISTIAN    CHUECH. 


PHILIP  "^CHAFF,  D.D. 


VOL.  III. 

FROM  COXSTAI(TINE  THE  GREAT  TO  GREGORY  THE  GREAT, 

A.  D.  311-600. 


NEW  YORK: 

CHARLES  SCRIBKER  AND  COMPANY. 
1867. 


ENTERED  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1867,  by 

CHARLES  SCRIBjSTER  &  CO., 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  Southern 
District  of  New  York. 


John  F.  Trow  &,  Co., 

PRINTERS,  STEREOTTPERS,  AND  ELECTKOTTPERS, 

50  Greene  Street,  New  York. 


CONTENTS  OF  THE  THIRD  VOLUME. 


THIRD   PERIOD. 

THE   CHURCH  IN   UNION  WITH   THE   ROMAN   EMPIRE. 
FROM  CONSTANTINE  THE  GREAT  TO  GREGORY  THE  GREAT,  A.  d.  311-590. 

CHAPTER  yjll. 

CHRISTIAN    ART. 

PAGE 

§  102.     Religion  and  Art, 539 

§  103.     Church  Architecture, 541 

§  104.     Consecration  of  Churches, 544 

§  105.     Interior  Arrangement  of  Churches, 545 

§  106.     Architectural  Style.     The  Basilicas, 551 

§  107.     The  Byzantine  Style, 555 

§  108.     Baptisteries,  Grave-Chapels,  and  Crypts, 558 

§  109.     Crosses  and  Crucifixes, 560 

§  110.     Images  of  Christ, 563 

§111.     Images  of  Madonna  and  Saints,       .        .  .        .        .        .5*71 

§  112.     Consecrated  Gifts, 574 

§  113.     Church  Poetry  and  Music, 575 

§114.     The  Poetry  of  the  Oriental  Church, 578 

§  115.     The  Latm  Hymn, 585 

§116.     Latin  Poets  and  Hymns, 589 


VI  TABLE   OF   CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  IX. 

THEOLOGY.   DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  ECUMENICAL  ORTHODOSy. 

^  PAGE 

§117.     General  Observations.     Doctrinal  Importance  of  the  Period.     Influ- 
ence of  the  Ancient  Philosophy, 600 

§  lis.     Sources  of  Theology.     Scripture  and  Tradition,        ....  606 

I. — ^The  Trinitarian  Controversies. 

General  Literature  of  the  Arian  Controversy, 616 

§  119.     The  Arian  Controversy  down  to  the  Council  of  Xicjea  (318-325),     .  618 

§  120.    The  Council  of  Nicaea :  a.  d.  325, 622 

§121.     The  Arian  and  Semi-Arian  Reaction:  A.  D.  325-361,        .        .         .632 
§  122.     The  Final  Victory  of  Orthodoxy,  and  the  Council  of  Constantinople : 

A.  D.  3S1 638 

§  123.     The  Theological  Principles  involved :  Import  of  the  Controversy,     .  641 

§  124.     Arianism, 644 

§  125.     Semi-Arianism, 649 

g  126.     Revived  SabeUianism.     Marcellus  and  Phothius,       ....  651 

§127.     The  Xicene  Doctrine  of  the  Homoousion, 654 

§  128.     The  Doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spu-it, 663 

§  129.     The  Nicene  and  Constantmopolitan  Creed, 667 

§130.     The  Xicene  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity.     The  Trinitarian  Terminology,  .  670 

§131.     The  Post-Xicene  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity, 684 

§  132.     The  Athanasian  Creed, 689 

II. — 77ie  Origenistic  Controversies. 

§  133.     The  Origenistic  Controversy 'in  Palestine,     Epiphanius,  Rufinus,  and 

Jerome :  a.  d.  394-399, 698 

§  134.     The  Origenistic  Controversy  in  Egypt  and  Constantinople.     Theo- 

philus  and  Chrysostomus:  A.  D.  399-407, 702 


III. — Tlie  Christological  Controversies. 

§  135.  General  Yie-v.     The  Alexandrian  and  Antiochian  School?, 

§136.  The  Apollmarian  Heresy :' A.  D.  362-381,        .... 

§137.  The  Nestorian  Controversy:  A.  D.  428-431,     .... 

g  138.  The  Ecumenical  Council  of  EiAesus:  a.  d.  431.     The  Compromise, 

§  1 39.  The  Xestorians, 

§  140.  The  Eutychian  Controversy.     Tlic  Council  of  Robbers :  a.  d.  449, 

§141.  The  Ecumenical  Council  of  Chalcedon:  a.  D.  451,     . 

§  142.  The  Orthodox  Christology.     Analysis  and  Criticism, 

§  143.  The  Monophysite  Controversy, 


705 
70S 
714 
722 
729 
734 
740 
747 
762 


TABLE    OF   CONTENTS.  VU 


§  144.  The  Three  Chapters  and  the  Fifth  Ecumenical  Council:  a.  d.  553,  .  768 
§  145.     The  Monophysitc  Sects :  Jacobites,  Copts,  Abyssinians,  Armenians, 

Maronites,     ....■» 772 

IV. — The  Anthropological  Controversies. 

Works  on  the  Pelagian  Controversy, 7S3 

§146.     Character  of  the  Pelagian  Controversy, 785 

§147.     External  History  of  the  Pelagian  Controversy :  A.  D.  411-431, .         .  790 

§  148.     The  Pelagian  Controversy  in  Palestine, 794 

§  149.  Position  of  the  Roman  Church.  Condemnation  of  Pelagianism,  .'  797 
§  150.     The  Pelagian  System :   Primitive  State  and  Freedom  of  Man ;  tlie 

FaU, 802 

§  151.     The  Pelagian  System  Continued:  Doctrine  of  Human  Ability  and 

Divine  Grace, 809 

§  152.     The  Augustinian  System :    The  Primitive  State  of  Man  and  Free 

WiU,     .         .         .     ^ 816 

§153.  The  Augustiaian  System  Continued :  The  FaU  and  its  Consequences,  824 
§  154.     The  Augustinian  System  Continued :  Original  Sin  and  the  Origin  of 

the  Soul, 829 

§  155.     Arguments  for  the  Doctrine  of  Original  Sin  and  Hereditary  Guilt,     .  833 

§  156.    Answers  to  Pelagian  Objections, 837 

§157.     Augustine's  Doctrine  of  Redeeming  Grace,      .        .        .        .        .  843 

§  158.     The  Doctrine  of  Predestination, 850 

§  159.     Semi-Pelagianism  and  Semi-Augustinianism, 857 

§160.     Victory  of  Semi-Augustinianism.     Council  of  Orange :  a.  d.  529,      .  865 


CHAPTER  X. 

CHURCH    FATHKES,    AND   THEOLOGICAL    LITERATURE. 

I. — The  Greek  Fathers. 

§161.     Eusebius  of  Csesarea, 871 

§  162.     The  Church  Historians  after  Eusebius, 879 

§  163.     Athanasius  the  Great, 884 

§  164.     BasU  the  Great, 893 

§  165.     Gregory  of  Nyssa, 903 

§  166.     Gregory  Nazianzen, 90S 

§167.     Didymus  of  Alexandria, 921 

§168.     Cyril  of  Jerusalem, 923 

§  169.     Epiphanius  and  the  Haereseologues, 926 

§  170.     John  Chrysostom, 933 

§171.     Cyril  of  Alexandria, 942 

§  172.     Ephrrem  the  Syrian, 949 


Till  TABLE   OF   CONTENTS. 


n. — The  Latin  Fathers. 

PAGE 

§  173.     Lactantius, 955 

§  174.     HUary  of  Poitiers, 959 

§  l'7o.     Ambrose, 961 

§  176.     Jerome  as  a  Divine  and  Scholar, 967 

§177.     The  Works  of  Jerome, 972 

§  178.     Augustme, 988 

§179.     The  Works  of  Augustine, 1003 

§  180.     The  Influence  of  Augustine  upon  Posterity  and  his  Relation  to 

Catholicism  and  Protestantism, 1016 

Alphabetical  Index  to  the  •Saees»-A»B  Third  Volumes,       .        ,        .  1029 


CHAPTEK  ym. 

CHEISTIAN   ART. 

§  102.     Religion  and  Art. 

Man  is  a  being  imiellectual,  or  thinking  and  knowing,  moral, 
or  willing  and  acting,  and  cesthetic,  or  feeling  and  enjoying. 
To  these  three  cardinal  faculties  corresponds  the  old  trilogy  of 
the  true,  the  good,  and  the  heautiful,  and  the  three  provinces  of 
science,  or  knowledge  of  the  truth,  virtue,  or  practice  of  the 
good,  and  art,  or  the  representation  of  the  beautiful,  the  harmo- 
ny of  the  ideal  and  the  real.  These  three  elements  are  of 
equally  divine  origin  and  destiny. 

Eehgion  is  not  so  much  a  separate  province  besides  these 
three,  as  the  elevation  and  sanctification  of  all  to  the  glory  of 
God.  It  represents  the  idea  of  holiness,  or  of  union  with  God, 
who  is  the  original  of  all  that  is  true,  good,  and  beautiful. 
Christianity,  as  perfect  religion,  is  also  perfect  humanity.  It 
hates  only  sin ;  and  this  belongs  not  originally  to  human  nature, 
but  has  invaded  it  from  without.  It  is  a  leaven  which  pervades 
the  whole  lump.  It  aims  at  a  harmonious  unfolding  of  all  the 
gifts  and  powers  of  the  soul.  It  would  redeem  and  regenerate 
the  whole  man,  and  bring  him  into  blessed  fellowship  with 
God.  It  enlightens  the  understanding,  sanctifies  the  will,  gives 
peace  to  the  heart,  and  consecrates  even  the  body  a  temple  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.  The  ancient  word  :  "  Homo  sum,  nihil  hu- 
mani  a  me  alienum  puto,"  is  fully  true  only  of  the  Christian. 
"  All  things  are  yours,"  says  the  Apostle.  All  things  are  of 
God,  and  for  God.     Of  these  truths  we  must  never  lose  sight, 


54:0  THIRD   PERIOD,    A.D.    311-590. 

notwitlistanding  the  manifold  abuses  or  imj^erfect  and  prema- 
ture applications  of  them. 

Hence  there  is  a  Christian  art,  as  well  as  a  Christian  science, 
a  spiritual  eloquence,  a  Christian  virtue.  Feeling  and  imagina- 
tion are  as  much  in  need  of  redemption,  anpl  capable  of  saucti- 
fication,  as  reason  and  will. 

The  proper  and  highest  mission  of  art  lies  in  the  w^orship 
of  God.  We  are  to  worship  God  "in  the  beauty  of  holiness." 
All  science  culminates  in  theology  and  theosophy,  all  art  be- 
comes perfect  in  cultus.  Holy  Scripture  gives  it  this  position, 
and  brings  it  into  the  closest  connection  with  religion,  from 
the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  to  the  last  chapter  of  the  Revela- 
tion, from  the  paradise  of  innocence  to  the  new  glorified  earth. 
This  is  especially  true  of  the  two  most  spiritual  and  noble  arts, 
of  poetry  and  music,  which  proclaim  the  praise  of  God — in  all 
the  great  epochs  of  the  history  of  his  kingdom  from  the  begin- 
ning to  the  consummation.  A  considerable  part  of  the  Bible : 
the  Psalms,  the  book  of  Job,  the  song  of  Solomon,  the  para- 
bles, the  Hevelation,  and  many  portions  of  the  historical,  jDro- 
phetical,  and  didactic  books,  are  poetical,  and  that  in  the  purest 
and  highest  sense  of  the  word.  Christianity  was  introduced 
into  the  world  with  the  song  of  the  heavenly  host,  and  the  con- 
summation of  the  church  will  be  also  the  consummation  of 
.poetry  and  song  in  the  service  of  the  heavenly  sanctuary. 

Art  has  always,  and  in  all  civilized  nations,  stood  in  in- 
timate connection  with  worship.  Among  the  heathen  it  minis- 
tered to  idolatry.  Hence  the  aversion  or  suspicion  of  the  early 
Christians  towards  it.  But  the  same  is  true  of  the  philosophy 
of  the  Greeks,  and  the  law  of  the  Eomans ;  yet  philosophy  and 
law  are  not  in  themselves  objectionable.  All  depends  on  the 
spirit  which  animates  these  gifts,  and  the  purpose  which  they 
are  made  to  serve. 

The  great  revolution  in  the  outward  condition  of  the  church 
under  Constantino  dissipated  the  prejudices  against  art  and  the 
hindrances  to  its  employment  in  the  service  of  the  church. 
There  now  arose  a  Christian  art  which  has  beautified  and 
enriched  the  worship  of  God,  and  created  immortal  monuments 
of  architecture,  painting,  poetry,  and  melody,  for  the  edifica- 


b 


(T'^ 


i,.u 


§  103.    cnmcH  aechitectuee.  5^1:1 

tion  of  all  ages ;  although,  as  the  cultns  of  the  early  church  in 
general  perpetuated  many  elements  of  Judaism  and  heathenism, 
so  the  history  of  Christian  art  exhibits  many  impurities  and 
superstitions  which  provoke  and  justify  protest.  Artists  have 
corrupted  art,  as  theologians  theology,  and  priests  the  church. 
But  the  remedy  for  these  imperfections  is  not  the  abolition  of 
art  and  the  banishment  of  it  from  the  church,  but  the  renova- 
tion and  ever  purer  shaping  of  it  by  the  spii'it  and  in  the  ser- 
vice of  Christianity,  which  is  the  religion  of  truth,  of  beauty, 
and  of  holiness. 

From  this  time,  therefore,  church  history  also  must  bring 
the  various  arts,  in  their  relation  to  Christian  worship,  into  the 
field  of  its  review.  Henceforth  there  is  a  history  of  Christian 
architecture,  sculpture,  painting,  and  above  all  of  Christian 
poetry  and  music. 


§  103.     Church  Architecture.  /  r.j.^  j^  ^  fj  i.  •/%  •, 

On  the  history  of  Architecture  in  general,  comp.  the  Tvorks  of  KrcLEBj^JiflSii*  / 
KiysEL,  SciTN'AAss^ and'  othcgD^-on  the-^jtasttc  arts;  al«T  KEErsER:      'Vtr6»  } 
'    Der  christliche  Kirchenbau,  seine  Geschichte,  SymboKk  u.  Bildnerei, 
Bonn,  1851.      2  vols.,*  '^n^l  lihi  Fnglinh   trmlrn  nf-^'"iTTn-^  Brnrr'Tj 

■  Architecture  is  required  to  provide  the  suitable  outward 
theatre  for  the  public  worship  of  God,  to  build  houses  of  God 
among  men,  where  he  may  hold  fellowship  with  his  people, 
and  bless  them  with  heavenly  gifts.  This  is  the  highest  office 
and  glory  of  the  art  of  building.  Architecture  is  a  handmaid 
of  devotion.  A  beautiful  church  is  a  sennon  in  stone,  and  its 
spire  a  finger  pointing  to  heaven.  Under  the  old  covenant 
there  was  no  more  important  or  splendid  building  than  the 
temple  at  Jerasalem,  which  was  erected  by  divine  command 
and  after  the  pattern  of  tlie  tabernacle  of  the  wilderness.  And 
yet  this  was  only  a  significant  emblem  and  shadow  of  what 
was  to  come. 

Christianity  is,  indeed,  not  bound  to  place,  and  may  every- 
where worship  the  omnipreseit  God.  The  apostles  and  martyrs 
held  the  most  solemn  worship  in  modest  private  dwelliiKrsgind  ^/y^  /^77^^*^ 


^>^#( 


542  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

even  in  deserts  and  subterranean  catacombs,  and  during  tlie 
whole  period  of  persecution  there  were  few  cliurcli  buildings 
properly  so  called.  The  cause  of  this  want,  however,  lay  not 
in  conscientious  objection,  but  in  the  oppressed  condition  of  the 
Christians.  'No  sooner  did  they  enjoy  external  and  internal 
peace,  than  they  built  special  places  of  devotion,  which  in  a 
normal,  orderly  condition  of  the  church  are  as  necessary  to 
.  public  worship  as  special  sacred  times.  The  first  certain  traces 
of  proper  church  buildings,  in  distinction  from  private  places, 
appear  in  the  second  half  of  the  third  century,  during  the  three- 
and-forty  years'  rest  between  the  persecution  of  Decius  and 
that  of  Diocletian.*  But  these  were  destroyed  in  the  latter 
persecution. 

The  period  of  church  building  properly  begins  with  Con- 
stantino the  Great.  After  Christianity  was  acknowledged  by 
the  state,  and  empowered  to  hold  property,  it  raised  houses  of 
worship  in  all  parts  of  the  Roman  empu'e.  There  was  proba- 
bly more  building  of  this  kind  in  the  fourth  century  than  there 
has  been  in  any  period  since,  excepting  perhaps  the  nineteenth 
century  in  the  United  States,  where,  every  ten  years,  hundreds 
of  churches  and  chapels  are  erected,  while  in  the  great  cities  of 
Europe  the  multiplication  of  churches  by  no  means  keeps  pace 
with  the  increase  of  population.''  Constantino  and  his  mother 
Helena  led  the  way  with  a  good  example.  The  emperor 
adorned  not  only  his  new  residential  city,  but  also  the  holy 
places  in  Palestine,  and  the  African  city  Constantino,  with  basil- 
icas, partly  at  his  own  expense,  partly  from  the  public  treasury. 
His  successors  on  the  throne,  excepting  Julian,  as  well  as 
bishops  and  wealthy  laymen,  vied  with  each  other  in  building, 
beautifying,  and  enriching  churches.  This  was  considered  a 
work  pleasing  to  God  and  meritorious.  Ambition  and  self- 
righteousness  mingled  thenisdves  here,  as  they  almost  every- 
where do,  with  zeal  for  the  glory  of  God.     Chrysostom  even 

^  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  viii.  1. 

'  The  cities  of  New  York,  Brooklyn,  and  Philadelphia,  for  instance,  have  more 
churches  than  the  much  older  cities  of  Berlin,  Vienna,  and  Paris.  New  York  has 
some  three  hundred,  Berlin  and  Paris  each  hardly  fifty.  This  is  a  noble  triumph  of 
\ffl     j^^  the  voluntary  princiiile  in  religion. 


§    103.      CHUECH   AKCHTTECTUEE.  543 

laments  that  many  a  time  tlie  poor  are  forgotten  in  the  church 
buildings,  and  suggests  that  it  is  not  enough  to  adorn  the  altar, 
the  walls,  and  the  floor,  but  that  we  must,  above  all,  offer  the 
soul  a  living  sacrifice  to  the  Lord.'  Jerome  also  rebukes  those 
who  haughtily  pride  themselves  in  the  costly  gifts  which  they 
offer  to  God,  and  du*ects  them  to  help  needy  fellow-Chiistians 
rather,  since  not  the  house  of  stone,  but  the  soul  of  the  believer 
is  the  true  temple  of  Christ. 

The  fourth  century  saw  in  the  city  of  Rome  above 
forty  great  churches.'  In  Constantinople  the  Church  of  the 
Apostles  and  the  church  of  St.  Sophia,  built  by  Constantine, 
excelled  in  magnificence  and  beauty,  and  in  the  fifth  centuiy 
were  considerably  enlarged  and  beautified  by  Justinian. 
Sometimes  heathen  temples  or  other  public  buildings  were  trans- 
formed for  Christian  worship.  The  Emperor  Phocas  (602-610), 
for  example,  gave  to  the  Roman  bishop  Boniface  lY,  the 
Pantheon,  built  by  Agrippa  under  Augustus,  and  renowned 
for  its  immense  and  magnificent  dome  (now  called  chiesa  della 
rotonda),  and  it  was  thenceforth  consecrated  to  the  virgin  Mary 
and  the  martyrs. 

But  generally  the  heathen  temples,  fi-om  their  small  size 
and  their  frequent  round  form,  were  not  adapted  for  the  Chris- 
tian worship,  as  this  is  held  within  the  building,  and  requires 
large  room  for  the  congregation,  that  the  preaching  and  the 
Scripture-reading  may  be  heard ;  wliile  the  heathen  sacrifices 
were  performed  before  the  portico,  and  the  multitude  looked 
on  without  the  sanctuary.  The  sanctuary  of  Pandrosos,  on  the 
Acropolis  at  Athens,  holds  but  few  persons,  and  even  the  Par- 
thenon is  not  so  capacious  as  an  ordinary  chm*ch.  The  Pan- 
theon in  Rome  is  an  exception,  and  is  much  larger  than  mo^t 
temples.  The  small  round  pagan  temples  were  most  easily 
convertible  into  Christian  baptisteries  and  burial  chapels.  Far 
more  frequently,  doubtless,  was  the  material  of  forsaken  or  de- 
stroyed temples  ajDplied  to  the  building  of  churches. 

'  Homil.  Isxx.  in  Matth.  §  2,  and  1.  §  3. 

'  Optatus  of  Mileve,  De  schism,  Donat.  ii.  4 :  "  Inter  quadraginta  et  quod  escur- 
rit  basilicas." 


544  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

§  104.     The  Consecration  of  Churches. 

itsTew  clinrclies  were  consecrated  witli  great  solemnity  by 
prayer,  singing,  the  communion,  eulogies  of  present  bisliops, 
and  the  depositing  of  relics  of  saints.'  This  service  set  them 
apart  from  all  profane  uses,  and  designated  them  exclusively 
for  the  sei'vice  and  praise  of  God  and  the  edification  of  his 
people.  The  dedication  of  Solomon's  temple,''  as  well  as  the 
purification  of  the  temple  after  its  desecration  by  the  heathen 
Syrians,"  furnished  the  biblical  authority  for  this  custom.  In 
times  of  persecution  the  consecration  must  have  been  performed 
in  silence.  But  now  these  occasions  became  festivals  attended 
by  multitudes.  Many  bishops,  like  Theodoret,  even  invited 
the  pagans  to  attend  them.  The  first  description  of  such  a 
festivity  is  given  us  by  Eusebius:  the  consecration  of  the 
church  of  the  Redeemer  at  the  Holy  Sepulchre,*  and  of  a 
church  at  Tyre.^ 

After  the  Jewish  precedent,"  it  was  usual  to  celi^rate  the 
anniversary  of  the  consecration.'' 

Churches  were  dedicated  either  to  the  holy*  Trinity,  or  to 
one  of  the  three  divine  Persons,  especially  Christ,  or  to  the 
Virgin  Mary,  or  to  apostles,  especially  Peter,  Paul,  and  John, 
or  to  distinguished  martyrs  and  saints. 

The  idea  of  dedication,  of  course,  by  no  means  necessarily 
involves  the  superstitious  notion  of  the  omnij^resent  God  being 
inclosed  in  a  definite  place.  On  the  contrary,  Solomon  had 
long  before  said  at  the  dedication  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem : 

'  This  last  was,  according  to  Ambrose,  Epist.  64,  the  custom  in  Eome,  and  cer- 
tainly  wherever  such  relics  were  to  be  had. 
=  2  Chron.  c.  5-7. 
'  1  Mace.  iv.  44  if. 

*  Vita  Constant,  iv.  43-46. 

*  Hist.  Eccl.  X.  2-4.  Eusebius  speaks  here  in  general  of  the  consecration  of 
churches  after  the  cessation  of  persecution,  and  then,  c.  4,  gives  an  oratio  p.incgyri- 
ca,  deUvered  probably  by  himself,  in  which  he  describes  the  church  at  Tyre  in  a 
minute,  but  pompous  way. 

"  Ta  iyKaivia,  in  memory  of  the  purification  of  the  temple  under  the  Maccabees, 
1  Mace.  iv.  69  ;  John  x.  22.     , 

''  Sozomen,  H.  E.  ii.  25  (26).  Gregory  the  Great  ordered:  "Solei^tatcs  ccclc 
Biarum  dedicationum  per  singulos  annos  sunt  celebranda)." 


§    105.      INTERIOR   AHEAiq-GEMENT   OF   CHTJECHES.  54:5 

"  Beliold,  the  heaven  and  heaven  of  heavens  cannot  contain 
thee  ;  how  much  less  this  house  that  I  have  builded."  When 
Athanasius  was  once  censured  for  assembling  the  congregation 
on  Easter,  for  want  of  room,  in  a  newly  built  but  not  yet  con- 
secrated church,  he  appealed  to  the  injunction  of  the  Lord,  that 
we  enter  into  our  closet  to  pray,  as  consecrating  every  place. 
Chrysostom  urged  that  every  house  should  be  a  church,  and 
every  head  of  a  family  a  spiritual  shepherd,  remembermg  the 
account  which  he  must  give  even  for  his  children  and  servants.' 
Not  walls  and  roof,  but  faith  and  life,  constitute  the  churcli,' 
and  the  advantage  of  prayer  in  the  church  comes  not  so  much 
from  a  special  holiness  of  the  place,  as  from  the  Christian  fel- 
lowship, the  bond  of  love,  and  the  prayer  of  the  priests.^  Au- 
gustine gives  to  his  congregation  the  excellent  admonition: 
"  It  is  your  duty  to  put  yom*  talent  to  usury ;  every  one  must 
be  bishop  in  his  own  house ;  he  must  see  that  his  wife,  his  son, 
his  daughter,  his  servant,  since  he  is  bought  witli  so  great  a 
price,  continues  in  the  true  faith.  The  apostle's  doctrine  has 
placed  the  master  over  the  servant,  and  has  bound  the  servant 
to  obedience  to  the  master,  but  Christ  has  paid  a  ransom  for 
both."^ 

§  105.     Interior  Arrangement  of  Churches. 

The  interior  arrangement  of  the  Christian  churches  in  part 
imitated  the  temple  at  Jenisalem,  in  part  proceeded  directly 
from  the  Christian  spirit.  It  exhibits,  therefore,  like  the  whole 
catholic  system,  a  mixtm-e  of  Judaism  and  Christianity.  At 
the  bottom  of  it  lay  the  ideas  of  the  priesthood  and  of  sacrifice, 
and  of  fellowship  with  God  administered  thereby. 

Accordingly,  in  every  large  church  after  Constantino  there 
were  three  main  divisions,  which  answered,  on  the  one  hand, 

'  Horn.  vi.  in  Gen.,  §  2 :  ^EKKX-qcriav  -KoiricrSv  aov  ri)v  olxiav  Kal  yap  /col  iirevdwos 
el  Kol  T^s  Tuiv  iraiSi'coj/  Kai  ttjs  oiKeTuv  auTTipias. 

'  Serm.  in  Eutrop. :  'H  inKXriaia  oh  xeDxos  naX  opocpos,  aWa  irlaris  koL  fi'ws. 

'  De  incomprehensibili :  'EvTavda  ia-ri  ri  ■ir\4ov,  oTov  t)  Ofxoyoia  koI  rj  (TVfj.<p(i>via 
Kol  T7JS  o7aTr7j9  6  (Tvv^ecrjxos  Kal  al  tuv  Upewv  ey^'*'' 

*  Serm.  9i. 

TOL.  n. — 35 


646  THIED   PERIOD.    A."D.    311-590. 

to  tlie  divisions  of  Solomon's  temple,  on  the  other,  to  the  three 
classes  of  attendants,  the  catechumens,  the  faithful,  and  the 
priests,  or  the  three  stages  of  approach  to  God.  The  evan- 
gelical idea  of  immediate  access  of  the  whole  believing  congre- 
gation to  the  throne  of  grace,  does  not  yet  appear.  The  priest- 
hood everywhere  comes  between. 

1.  The  PORTICO :  In  this  again  must  be  distinguished  : 

(a)  The  inner  portico,  a  covered  hall  which  belonged  to  the 
church  itself,  and  was  called  7rp6vao<i,  or  commonly,  from  its 
long,  narrow  shape,  vdp^rj^,  ferula,  i.  e.,  literally,  staff,  rod.'' 
The  nsLvaG paradise  also  occurs,  because  on  one  side  of  the  wall 
of  the  portico  Adam  and  Eve  in  paradise  were  frequently 
painted, — probably  to  signify  that  the  fallen  posterity  of  Adam 
find  again  their  lost  paradise  in  the  church  of  Christ.  The 
inner  court  was  the  place  for  all  the  unbaptized,  for  catechu- 
mens, pagans,  and  Jews,  and  for  members  of  the  church  con- 
demned to  light  penance,  who  might  hear  the  preaching  and 
the  reading  of  the  Scriptures,  but  must  withdraw  before  the 
administration  of  the  Holy  Supper. 

(b)  Tlie  outer  portico,  avXij,  atrium,  also  loeus  lugentium  or 
hiemaniium,  which  was  open,  and  not  in  any  way  enclosed 
within  the  sacred  walls,  hence  not  a  part  of  the  house  of  God 
properly  so  called.  Here  those  under  heavy  penance,  the 
"  weepers" "  as  they  were  called,  must  tarry,  exposed,  to  all 
weather,  and  apply  with  tears  to  those  entering  for  their 
Christian  intercessions. 

In  this  outer  portico,  or  atrium,  stood  the  laver^  in  which, 
after  the  primitive  Jewish  and  heathen  custom,  maintained  to 
this  day  in  the  Roman  church,  the  worshipper,  in  token  of  in- 
ward purification,  must  wash  every  time  he  entered  the  church." 

*  Sometimes  the  narthex  again  was  divided  into  two  rooms,  the  upper  place  for 
the  kneelers  (locus  substratorum),  i.  c,  catechumens  who  might  participate,  kneel- 
ing, in  the  prayers  after  the  sermon  (hence  genuflectentes,  yoifVK\ivopTes),  and  the 
lower  place,  bordering  on  the  outer  portico,  for  mere  hearers,  Jews,  and  pagans 
(locus  audientium). 

^  Flentes,  hiemantes.  / 

'  KprivTj,  cantharus,  phiala. 

*  In  Num.  xix.  2  ff. ;  xxxi.  19  ff.  (com p.  Heb.  ix.  13)  the  sprinkling- water,  or 
"  water  of  separation  "  {i.  e.,  water  of  purification,  LXX. :  iiSaip  pavTiofj-ov),  already 


.  I 


§   105.      INTEEIOE   AEEANGEMENT   OF   CHTJKCHES.  547 

After  about  tlie  ninth  century,  when  churches  were  no 
longer  built  with  spacious  porticoes,  this  laver  was  transferred 
to  the  church  itself,  and  fixed  at  the  doors  in  the  form  of  a  holy- 
water  basin,  supposed  to  be  an  imitation  of  the  brazen  sea  in 
the  priest's  com't  of  Solomon's  temple/"  This  symbolical  usage 
could  easily  gather  upon  itself  superstitious  notions  of  the 
magical  virtue  of  the  holy  water.  Even  in  the  pseudo-Apos- 
tolic Constitutions  the  consecrated  water  is  called  "  a  means  of 
warding  off  diseases,  frightening  away  evil  spirits,  a  medicrne 
for  body  and  soul,  and  for  purification  from  sins ; "  and  though 
these  expressions  related  primarily  to  the  sacramental  water  of 
baptism  as  the  bath  of  regeneration,  yet  they  were  easily  ap- 
plied by  the  people  to  consecrated  water  in  general.  In 
the  Roman  Catholic  church  the  consecration  of  the  water  ^  is 
performed  on  Easter  Sunday  evening;  in  the  Greco-Eussian 
church,  three  times  in  the  year. 

2.  The  TEivrPLE  proper,'  the  holy  place,^  or  the  nave  of  the 
church,^  as  it  were  the  ark  of  the  new  covenant.  This  part 
extended  from  the  doors  of  entrance  to  the  steps  of  the  altar, 
had  sometimes  two  or  four  side-naves,  according  to  the  size  of 
the  church,  and  was  designed  for  the  body  of  the  laity,  the 
faithful  and  baptized.  The  men  sat  on  the  right  towards  the 
south  (in  the  men's  nave),  the  women  oU  the  left  towards  the 

appears,  prepared  from  the  ashes  of  the  burned  red  heifer  and  water,  and  used  for 
the  cleansing  of  those  made  unclean  by  contact  with  a  corpse.  The  later  Jews  were 
very  strict  in  this ;  no  one  could  appear  in  the  temple  or  synagogue,  or  perform  any 
act  of  worship,  prayer,  or  sacrifice,  without  being  washed,  1  Sam.  xvi.  5  ;  2  Chron. 
XXX.  17.  Therefore  synagogues  were  built  by  preference  in  the  neighborhood  of 
streams.  The  Pharisees  were  very  paltry  and  pedantic  in  the  matter  of  these  wash- 
ings ;  comp.  Matt.  xv.  2 ;  Mark  vii.  3 ;  Luke  xi.  38.  The  same  custom  of  symboli- 
cal purification  before  worship  we  find  among  the  ancient  Egyptians,  Persians, 
Brahmans  (who  ascribed  to  the  water  of  the  Ganges  saving  virtue),  Greeks,  and  Ro- 
mans, and  among  the  Mohammedans.  At  the  entrance  of  every  Turkish  mosquo 
stands  a  large  font  for  this  purpose. 

'  1  Kings  vii.  23-26 ;  2  Chron.  iv.  2-5. 

^  Benedictio  fontis. 
Nad's. 

*  'lep6v. 

'  NaCy,  navis  ecclesise.  Many  derive  this  expression  from  a  confusion  of  the 
Greek  vaSs  with  vavs  and  navis.  Not  tiU  the  ninth  and  tenth  centuries  is  navis  used 
in  this  way.     The  more  exact  equivalent  in  English  would  be  long-room^  or  hall. 


548  THIED   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

north  (in  the  women's  nave),  or,  in  Eastern  countries,  where 
the  sexes  were  more  strictly  separated,  in  the  galleries  above.* 
The  monks  and  nnns,  and  the  higher  civil  officers,  especially 
the  emperors  with  their  families,  usually  had  special  seats  of 
honor  in  semicircular  niches  on  both  sides  of  the  altar. 

About  the  middle  of  the  main  nave  was  the  pulpit  or  the 
anibo,^  or  subsequently  two  desTcs,  at  the  left  the  Gosj)el-desJc, 
at  the  right  the  Epistle-deslc,  where  the  lector  or  deacon  read 
the  Scripture  lessons.  The  sermon  was  not  always  delivered 
fi'om  the  pulpit,  but  more  frequently  either  from  the  steps  of 
the  altar  (hence  the  phrase :  "  speaking  from  the  rails  "),  or  from, 
the  seat  of  the  bishop  behind  the  altar-table.' 

Between  the  reading-desks  and  the  altar  was  the  odeum^  the 
place  for  the  singers,  and  at  the  right  and  left  the  seats  for  the 
lower  clergy  (anagnosts  or  readers,  exorcists,  acolytes).  This 
part  of  the  nave  lay  somewhat  higher  than  the  floor  of  the 
church,  though  not  so  high  as  the  altar-choii',  and  hence  was 
also  called  the  lower  choir,  and  the  gradual,  because  steps 
(gradus)  led  up  to  it.  In  the  Eastern  church  the  choir  and 
nave  are  scarcely  separated,  and  they  form  together  the  vad<i^ 
or  temple  hall ;  in  the  "Western  the  choir  and  the  sanctuary  are 
put  together  under  the  name  cancelU  or  chancel. 

3.  The  MOST  HOLY  PLACE,*  or  the  choir  proper ; '  called  also 
in  distinction  from  the  lower  choir,  the  high  choir^  for  the 
priests,  and  for  the  offering  of  the  sacrifice  of  the  Eucharist. 

*  Called  inepua,  the  elevated  galleries  on  the  side  walls.  Besides  this  the  wom- 
en's places  were  protected  by  wooden  lattices  from  all  curious  or  lascivious  glances 
of  the  men.  Chrj-sostom  says,  Homil.  T4  in  Matth. :  "  Formerly  these  lattices  cer- 
tainly did  not  exist ;  for  in  Christ  there  is  neither  male  nor  female  (Gal.  iii.  28),  and 
in  the  time  of  the  apostles  men  and  women  were  together  with  one  accord.  But 
then  men  were  still  men,  and  women  were  women ;  now  women  have  sunk  to  the 
level  of  prostitutes,  and  men  are  Uke  horses  in  rutting."  A  sad  commentary  on  the 
moral  and  religious  condition  of  that  time ! 

'  "AjjlPciv,  from  avajiaivai,  pulpitum,  suggestus.     Hence  the  English  pulpit,  while 
the  corresponding  German  Kanzel  is  derived  from  cancelli. 
^  BTJjua,  exedra. 

*  'CiZuov.  Subsequently  the  singers  were  usually  placed  in  the  galleries  or 
upper-church. 

*  Ta  a-^ia,  ruv  aylccv,  to  SSuto,  Uparilov,  sacrarium,  sanctuarium. 

*  Xop<Jy,  firitxa  (ascensus).  ''  Hence  the  terms  high  mass,  high  altar. 


§   105.      INTEEIOK   AKEANGEMENT   OF   CHUEGHES.  549 

No  layman,  excepting  the  emperor  (in  the  east),  might  enter  it. 
It  was  semi-circular  or  conchoidal  in  form,'  and  was  situated  at 
the  eastern  end  of  the  chm'ch,  opposite  the  entrance  doors,  be- 
cause the  light,  to  which  Christians  should  turn  themselves, 
comes  from  the  east/  It  was  separated  from  the  other  part 
of  the  church  by  rails  or  a  lattice,'  and  by  a  cui-tain,  or  by 
sacred  doors  called  in  the  Greek  church  the  picture-wall,  icon- 
ostas,  on  account  of  the  sacred  paintings  on  it/  While  in  the 
Eastern  churches  this  screen  is  still  used,  it  in  time  gave  place 
in  the  West  to  a  low  balustrade. 

In  the  middle  of  the  sanctuary  stood  the  altar ^  generally  a 
table,  or  sometimes  a  chest  with  a  lid ;  at  first  of  wood,  then, 
after  the  beginning  of  the  sixth  century,  of  stone  or  marble,  or 
even  of  silver  and  gold,  with  a  wall  behind  it,  and  an  over- 
shadowing, dome-shaped   canopy,"  above  wdiich  a  cross  was 

'  Hence  called  also  KojxVy  shell. 

^  Thus  so  early  as  this  was  the  line  of  east  and  west  established  as  the  sacred 
(or  church-building)  line.  Yet  there  were  exceptions.  Socrates,  H.  E.  v.  22,  notes 
it  as  peculiar  in  the  church  of  Antioch,  that  the  altar  here  stood  not  in  the  eastern 
end,  but  in  the  western  {ov  yap  irphs  auaToXas  rh  ^ucnacTTvpiov,  aWa  Trpos  Suaiv  opS.), 

^  'Aju^iSvpa,  KiyK\i8es,  cancelli,  whence  the  name  chancel. 

*  Eusebius  mentions,  in  his  description  of  the  church  of  the  bishop  Paulinus  in 
Tyre,  H.  E.  x.  4,  an  elegantly  wrought  lattice,  and  Athanasius  mentions  the  curtains. 
Indeed,  the  pictures  placed  upon  these  curtains  date  back  even  to  the  fourth  century, 
since  Epiphanius,  Ep.  ad  Joann.  Hierosolymit.,  inveighed  agaiast  a  painted  curtain  in 
a  village  of  PalestLue.  The  lattice  has  perpetuated  itself  to  this  day  in  the  picture 
wall  or  iconostas  {i'lKovdaTaais)  in  the  Russo-Greek  church.  It  bears,  on  the  right, 
the  picture  of  Christ,  and  on  the  left,  that  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  is  pierced  with 
three  doors ;  the  middle  one,  called  the  Emperor's  gate  {diceri  Zarskija),  because 
only  the  emperor,  besides  the  chief  priest,  may  pass  through  it  to  take  the  holy  Sup- 
per, is  decorated  and  distiaguished  with  the  utmost  splendor ;  oftentimes  a  golden 
sun  with  a  thousand  rays  appears,  which  suddenly  separates  during  the  worship, 
and  discloses  the  altar ;  or  a  Mount  Zion  with  innumerable  temples  and  battlements ; 
or  a  network  of  golden  garlands  of  flowers  and  fruits,  among  which  especially  clus- 
ters of  grapes,  probably  with  reference  to  the  sacramental  wine,  frequently  occur. 

*  Altare,  mensa  sacra,  ^vataarripioy,  ayla  rpdire^a.  The  altar-cloth,  palla,  pallia^ 
covers  the  whole  upper  face  of  the  altar.  This  must  not  be  confounded  with  the 
corporate  (eiAT]  rov,  from  ciAeo!,  involvo),  ?".  e.,  a  white  linen  cloth,  with  which  the 
oblations  prepared  upon  the  altar  are  covered. 

^  rii/p-yos,  tower;  Kifiwpiov  (of  doubtful  origin),  ciborium,  umbraculum.  Subse- 
quently the  ciboriiun  gave  place  to  the  steeple-shaped  tahernaculum  for  the  preserva- 
tion of  the  body  of  Christ.  With  the  ciborium  the  dove-shaped  form  of  the  recep- 
tacle for  the  body  of  Christ  (hence  called  irepiTT-fipiov)  also  gradually  disappeared. 


550  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

usually  fixed.  The  altar  was  hollow,  and  served  as  the  recepta- 
cle for  the  relics  of  the  martyrs ;  it  was  placed,  where  this  was 
possible,  exactly  over  the  grave  of  a  martyr,  probably  with 
reference  to  the  passage  in  the  Revelation  :  "  I  saw  under  the 
altar  the  souls  of  them  that  were  slain  for  the  word  of  God,  and 
for  the  testimony  which  they  held." '  Often  a  subterranean 
chapel  or  crypt '  was  built  under  the  church,  in  order  to  have 
the  church  exactly  upon  the  burial  place  of  the  saint,  and  at 
the  same  time  to  keep  alive  the  memory  of  the  primitive  worship 
in  underground  vaults  in  the  times  of  persecution. 

The  altar  held  therefore  the  twofold  ofiice  of  a  tomb  (though 
at  the  same  time  the  monument  of  a  new,  higher  life),  and  a 
place  of  sacrifice.  It  was  manifestly  the  most  holy  jDlace  in  the 
entire  church,  to  which  everything  else  had  regard ;  whereas 
in  Protestantism  the  pulpit  and  the  word  of  God  come  into  the 
foreground,  and  altar  and  sacrament  stand  back.  Hence  the 
altar  was  adorned  also  in  the  richest  manner  with  costly  cloths, 
with  the  cross,  or  at  a  later  period  the  crucifix,  with  burning 
tapers,  symbolical  of  Christ  the  light  of  the  world,^  and  pre- 
viously consecrated  for  ecclesiastical  use,*  with  a  splendid  cof)y 
of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  or  the  mass-book,  but  above  all  with 
the  tabernacle,  or  little  house  for  preserving  the  consecrated 
host,  on  which  in  the  middle  ages  the  German  stone-cutters 
and  sculptors  displayed  wonderful  art. 

Side  altaes  did  not  come  into  use  until  Gregory  the  Great. 

^  Rev.  vi.  9.  In  the  Greek  and  Roman  churches  every  altar  must  contain  some 
relics,  be  they  never  so  unimportant. 

'  KpvTTTai,  memoriae,  coufessiones,  testimonia. 

^  This  usage  also  no  doubt  came  from  Judaism  into  the  Christian  church ;  for  in 
the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  and  in  the  tabernacle  before  it,  a  lamp  was  perpetually 
burning  according  to  divine  command,  Exod.  xxvii.  30  f.  Probably  lamps  were  in 
earlier  use  in  the  church.  But  tapers  also  were  already  in  use  in  the  time  of  Chry- 
sostom,  especially  for  lighting  the  altar,  while  lamps  were  rather  employed  in  chapels 
and  before  images  of  saints. 

*  In  the  Roman  church  the  second  of  February,  or  the  fortieth  day  after  Christ- 
mag,  when  Mary  presented  the  Lord  in  the  temple,  and  when  the  aged  Simeon 
prophetically  called  the  child  Jesus  "  a  light  to  lighten  the  Gentiles,"  is  appomted 
for  this  consecration,  and  is  hence  called  Candlemas  of  Mart/,  a  contraction  of  the 
two  names,  Purification  of  Mary  and  Candlemas. 


§   106.      AECHrrECTUEAL   STYLE.      THE   BASILICAS.  551 

Ignatius/  AtTianasius,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  and  Augustine  know 
of  only  one  altar  in  the  church.  The  Greek  church  has  no 
more  to  this  day.  The  introduction  of  such  side  altars,  which 
however  belong  not  to  the  altar  space,  but  to  the  nave  of 
the  church,  is  connected  with  the  progress  of  the  worship  of 
martyrs  and  relics. 

At  the  left  of  the  altar  was  the  table  oi jprotheais^^  on  which 
the  elements  for  the  holy  Supper  were  prepared,  and  which  is 
still  used  in  the  Greek  church ;  at  the  right  the  sacristy^  where 
the  priests  robed  themselves,  and  retired  for  silent  prayer.  Be- 
hind the  altar  on  the  circular  wall  (and  under  the  painting  of 
Christ  enthroned,  if  there  was  one)  stood  the  Mshoj/s  chair,* 
overlooking  the  whole  church.  On  both  sides  of  it,  in  a 
semicircle,  were  the  seats  of  the  presbyters.  None  but  the 
clergy  were  allowed  to  receive  the  holy  Supper  within  the 
altar  rails.' 


§  106.    Architectural  Style.     The  Basilicas. 

Comp.  the  works  on  the  Basilicas  by  P.  Sarnelli  (Antica  Basilicografia. 
Neapoli,  1686),  CiAMPrsi  (Eom.  1693),  Guttensohn  &  Knapp  (Monu- 
menta  di  rel.  christ.,  ossia  raccolta  delle  antiche  chiese  di  Eoma, 
Rom.  1822  sqq.  3  vols. ;  also  in  German,  Mtinchen,  1843),  Bus-sex 
(Die  Basiliken  des  christlichen  Roms.  Milnchen,  1843,  a  commentary 
on  the  preceding),  Vox  Quast  (Berl.  1845),  and  Zesteeiia^jx  (Die 
antiken  und  die  christlichen  Basiliken.    Leipz.  1847). 

The  history  of  church  building,  from  the  simple  basilicas 
of  the  fourth  century  to  the  perfect  Gothic  cathedrals  of  the 
thirteenth  and  fourteenth,  exhibits,  like  the  history  of  the 
other  Christian  arts  and  the  sciences,  a  gradual  subjection  and 

'  He  even  expressly  (Ep.  ad  Philad.  c.  4)  likens  the  unity  of  the  church  in  the 
episcopate  to  the  unity  of  the  altar:  "Er  dvaiaaT'{]pioy,  ws  fh  iirlaKOTTos. 

*  npo'Seo-iy,  oblationarium,  still  used  in  the  Greek  church. 

^  "ZKivoipvKixKTiov,  diaicoviKuy,  sacristia,  sacrorum  custodia,  salutatorium,  etc. 

*  QpSvos,  cathedra. 

'  Before  Ambrose  the  emperors  vere  permitted  to  take  their  seats  within  the 
altar-space.  But  Ambrose,  with  the  approval  of  Theodosius,  abohshed  this  custom, 
and  assigned  to  the  emperors  a  special  place  at  the  head  of  the  congregation,  just 
outside  the  rails.     Sozomen,  H.  E.  vu.  25. 


552  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

transformation  of  previous  Jewish  and  heathen  forms  by  the 
Christian  principle.  The  church  succeeded  to  the  inheritance 
of  all  nations,  but  could  only  by  degrees  purge  this  inheritance 
of  its  sinful  adulterations,  pervade  it  with  her  spirit,  and  sub- 
ject it  to  her  aims ;  for  she  fulfils  her  mission  through  human 
freedom,  not  in  sj)ite  of  it,  and  does  not  magically  transform 
nations,  but  legitimately  educates  them. 

The  history  of  Western  architecture  is  the  richer.  The 
East  contented  itself  with  the  Byzantine  style,  and  adhered 
more  strictly  to  the  forms  of  the  round  temples,  baptisteries, 
and  mausoleums ;  while  the  "West,  starting  from  the  Koman 
basilica,  developed  various  styles. 

The  style  of  the  earliest  Christian  churches  was  not  copied 
from  the  heathen  temples,  because,  apart  from  their  connection 
with  idolatry,  which  was  itself  highly  offensive  to  the  Chris- 
tian sentiment,  they  were  in  form  and  arrangement,  as  we 
have  already  remarked,  entirely  unsuitable  to  Christian  wor- 
ship. The  primitive  Christian  architecture  followed  the  basili- 
cas, and  hence  the  churches  built  in  this  style  were  themselves 
called  basilicas.  The  connection  of  the  Christian  and  heathen 
basilicas,  which  has  been  hitherto  recognized,  and  has  been 
maintained  by  celebrated  connoisseurs,'  has  been  denied  by 
some  modern  investigators,''  who  have  claimed  for  the  Chris- 
tian an  entirely  independent  origin.  And  it  is  perfectly  true, 
as  concerns  thfe  interior  arrangement  and  symbolical  import  of 
the  building,  that  these  can  be  ascribed  to  the  Christian  mind 
alone.  Nor  have  any  forensic  or  mercantile  basilicas,  to  our 
knowledge,  been  transformed  into  Christian  churches.^  But  in 
external  architectural  form  there  is  without  question  an  affini- 
ty, and  there  appears  no  reason  why  the  church  should  not 
have  employed  this  classic  form. 

The  basilicas,^  or  royal  halls,  were  public  judicial  and  mer- 

*  Bunsen,  Schnaase,  Kugler,  Kinkel,  Quast,  &c. 
^  Zcstcrmann  (184'7)  and  Krauser  (1851). 

^  The  passage  quoted  for  this  view  from  Ausoiiius  m  his  address  of  thanks  to 
the  emperor  Gratian,  his  pupil,  c.  2 :  "  Forum  ct  basihca  olim  negotiis  plena,  nunc 
votis,  votisque  pro  tua  salute  susceptia,"  implies  only,  according  to  the  connection, 
that  now  all  liouses  and  puljhc  places  are  full  of  good  wishes  for  the  emperor. 

*  'S.roai  /SatriAucai.     The  name  comes  from  that  of  tlic  highest  civil  magistrate, 


§    106.      ARCHITECTURAL   STYLE.      THE   BASILICAS.  553 

cantile  buildings,  of  simple,  but  beautiful  structure,  in  the 
form  of  a  long  rectangle,  consisting  of  a  main  hall,  or  main 
nave,  two,  often  four,  side  naves,'  which  were  separated  by 
colonnades  from  the  central  space,  and  were  somewhat  lower. 
Here  the  people  assembled  for  business  and  amusement.  At 
the  end  of  the  hall  opposite  the  entrance,  stood  a  semicircular, 
somewhat  elevated  niche  (apsis,  tribune),  arched  over  with  a 
half-dome,  where  were  the  seats  of  the  judges  and  advocates, 
and  where  judicial  business  was  transacted.  Under  the  floor 
of  the  tribunal  was  sometimes  a  cellar-like  place  of  confine- 
ment for  accused  criminals. 

In  the  history  of  architecture,  too,  there  is  a  ISTemesis.  As 
the  cross  became  changed  from  a  sign  of  weakness  to  a  sign  of 
honor  and  victory,  so  must  the  basilica  in  which  Christ  and 
innumerable  martyrs  were  condemned  to  death,  become  a 
place  for  the  worship  of  the  crucified  One.  The  judicial  trib- 
une became  the  altar ;  the  seat  of  the  prsetor  behind  it  became 
the  bishop's  chair ;  the  benches  of  the  jurymen  became  the 
seats  of  presbyters ;  the  hall  of  business  and  trade  became  a 
place  of  devotion  for  the  faithful  people ;  the  subterranean  jail 
became  a  crypt  or  burial  place,  the  superterrene  birth-place, 
of  a  Christian  martyr.  To  these  were  added  other  changes, 
especially  the  introduction  of  a  cross-nave  between  the  apse 
and  the  main  nave,  giving  to  the  basilica  the  symbolical  form 
of  the  once  despised,  but  now  glorious  cross,  and  forming,  so 
to  speak,  a  recumbent  crucifix.  The  cross  with  equal  arms  is 
called  the  Greek ,  that  with  unequal  arms,  in  which  the  tran- 
sept is  shorter  than  the  main  nave  from  the  entrance  to  the 

the  &px<'v  PaaiKivs,  who  held  court  in  these  buildings.  In  the  church  this  designa- 
tion was  very  naturally  transferred  to  Christ,  as  the  supreme  King  and  Judge. 
Though  of  Greek  origin,  the  basilicas  first  reached  their  full  development  in  Eome, 
and,  properly  speaking,  arose  from  the  forum  Romanum.  They  were  strictly  fora 
for  the  people,  but  roofed,  and  so  protected  from  rain  and  heat.  The  city  of  Kome 
had  ten  of  them :  the  Bas.  Juha,  Ulpia,  Porcia,  Marciana,  &;c.  Zestermann,  how- 
ever, denies  the  connection  of  the  Roman  basilica  with  the  Athenian  (noh.  ffacrlAetos, 
and  derives  it  from  the  later  tunes  of  Roman  luxury,  when  the  name  hasiUcus  was 
applied  to  everything  grand  and  costly. 

*  Basilicas  with  a  single  nave  are  very  rare.  The  pagan  basilica  of  Trier  is  an 
instance,  and  the  small  church  of  St.  Balbma  in  Rome,  said  to  have  been  built  by 
Gregory  I.  in  the  beginning  of  the  seventh  century. 


554:  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

altar,  the  Latin.  Towers,  which  express  the  heavenward  spirit 
of  the  Christian  religion,  were  not  introduced  till  the  ninth 
century,  and  were  then  built  primarily  for  bells. 

This  style  found  rapid  acceptance  in  the  course  of  the  fourth 
century  with  East  and  "West ;  most  of  all  in  Home,  where  a  con- 
siderable number  of  basilicas,  some  in  their  ancient  venerable 
simplicity,  some  with  later  alterations,  are  still  preserved. 
The  church  of  St.  Maria  Maggiore  on  the  Esquiline  hill  affords 
the  best  view  of  an  ancient  basilica;  the  oldest  principal 
church  of  Rome — S.  Giovanni  in  Laterano  (so  named  from  the 
Eoman  patrician  family  of  the  Laterans),  dedicated  to  the 
Evangelist  John  and  to  John  the  Baptist ;  the  church  of  St. 
Paul,  outside  the  city  on  the  way  to  Ostia,  which  was  burnt  in 
1823,  but  afterwards  rebuilt  splendidly  in  the  same  style,  and 
consecrated  by  the  pope  in  December,  1854 ;  also  S.  Clemente, 
S.  Agnese,  and  S.  Lorenzo,  outside, the  walls — are  examples. 
The  old  church  of  St.  Peter  (Basilica  Yaticana),  which  was 
built  on  the  spot  of  this  apostle's  martyrdom,  the  IS'eronian 
circus,  and  was  torn  down  in  the  fifteenth  century  (the  last 
remnant  did  not  fall  till  1606),  sui-passed  all  other  churches  of 
Pome  in  splendor  and  wealth,  and  was  rebuilt,  not  in  the  same 
style,  but,  as  is  well  known,  in  the  Italian  style  of  the  six- 
teenth century. 

Next  to  Pome,  Pavenna  is  rich  in  old  church  buildings, 
among  which  the  great  basilica  of  S.  Apollinare  in  Classe  (in 
the  port  town,  three  miles  from  the  main  city,  and  built  about 
the  middle  of  tlie  sixth  century)  is  the  most  notable.  The 
transept,  as  in  all  the  churches  of  this  city,  is  wanting. 

In  the  East  Poman  empire  there  appeared  even  under  Con- 
stantine  sundry  departures  and  transitions  toward  the  Byzan- 
tine style.  The  oldest  buildings  there,  which  follow  more  or 
less  the  style  of  the  Poman  basilica,  are  the  church  at  Tyre, 
begun  in  313,  destroyed  in  the  middle  ages,  but  known  to  us 
from  the  description  of  the  historian  Eusebius ; '  the  original 
St.  Sophia  of  Constantino  in  Constantinoj^le ;  and  the  churches 
in  the  Holy  Land,  built  likewise  by  him  and  his  mother 
Helena,  at  Mamre  or  Hebron,  at  Bethlehem  over  the  bu-th- 

*  In  the  panegyric  addressed  to  Paulinus,  bishop  of  Tyre,  Hist.  Eccl.  x.  c.  4. 


§    107.      THE  BTZANTmE   STYLE.  555 

spot  of  Christ,  on  the  Mount  of  Olives  in  memory  of  the  ascen- 
sion, and  over  the  holy  sepulchre  on  Mount  Calvary.  Justinian 
also  sometimes  built  basilicas,  for  variety,  together  with  his 
splendid  Byzantine  churches;  and  of  these  the  church  of  St. 
Maiy  in  Jerusalem  was  the  finest,  and  was  destined  to  imitate 
the  temple  of  Solon] on,  but  it  was  utterly  blotted  out  by  the 
Mohammedans.' 


§  lOT.     The  Byzantine  Style. 

Peooopius  :  De  sedificiis  JustinianL  L.  i.  c.  1-3.  Cae.  Dufeesne  Dom. 
Du  Cange  :  Constantinopolis  Christiana.  Yenet.  1729.  Salzexbeeg 
UND  KoETtJM:  Altcliristliclie  Baadenkmale  Constantinopels  vom  V. 
bis  XII.  Jahrh.  (40  magnificent  copperplates  and  illustrations).  Berlin, 
1854. 

The  second  style  which  meets  us  in  this  period,  is  the 
Byzantine,  which  in  the  West  modified  the  basilica  style,  in 
the  East  soon  superseded  it,  and  in  the  Russo-Greek  church 
has  maintained  itself  to  this  day.  It  dates  from  the  sixth  cen- 
tury, fi-om  the  reign  of  the  scholarly  and  art-loving  emperor 
Justinian  I.  (527-565),  which  was  the  flourishing  period  of 
Constantinople  and  of  the  centralized  ecclesiastico-political 
despotism,  in  many  respects  akin  to  the  age  of  Louis  XIY.  of 
France. 

Tlie  characteristic  feature  of  this  style  is  the  hemispherical 
dome,  which,  like  the  vault  of  heaven  with  its  glory,  spanned 
the  centre  of  the  Greek  or  the  Latin  cross,  supported  by  massive 
columns  (instead  of  slender  pillars  like  the  basilicas),  and  by 
its  height  and  its  prominence  ruling  the  other  parts  of  the 
building.  This  dome  corresponds  on  the  one  hand  to  the  cen- 
tralizing principle  of  the  Byzantine  empire,^  but  at  the  same 

*  Comp.  the  more  minute  descriptions  of  these  churches  in  the  above-mentioned 
illustrated  work  of  Guttensohn  and  Knapp :  Monumenta  di  reUgione  christ.,  etc., 
1822-'2*r,  and  the  explanatory  text  by  Bunsen :  Die  Basiliken  des  christL  Roms. 
Miinchen,  1843.  Also  Gottfried  Kinkel:  Geschichte  der  bildenden  Kiinsten  bei  den 
christUchen  Yolkern,  i.  p,  61  st^q.,  and  Ferd.  von  Quast:  Die  Basiiika  der  Alten. 

^  Kurtz,  in  his  large  Handbuch  der  K.  Gesch.,  3d  ed.  i.  372,  well  says:  "The 
Byzantine  state,  in  that  maturity  of  it  which  Constantine  introduced  and  Justinian 
completed,  was,  in  polity,  as  astonishing,  gorgeous,  majestic  a  centralized  edifice,  as 


556  THIRD  PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

time,  and  far  more  clearly  tlian  the  flat  basilica,  to  that  upward 
striving  of  the  Christian  spirit  from  the  earth  toTvards  the 
height  of  heaven,  which  afterwards  more  plainly  expressed 
itself  in  the  pointed  arches  and  the  towers  of  the  Germanic 
cathedi"al,  "  While  in  the  basilica  style  everything  looks 
towards  the  end  of  the  building  where  the  altar  and  episcopal 
throne  ai'e  set,  and  by  this  prevailing  connection  the  upward 
direction  is  denied  a  free  expression,  in  the  dome  structure 
everything  concentrates  itself  about  the  spacious  centre  of  the 
building  over  which,  di'awiug  the  eye  irresistibly  upward,  rises 
to  an  awe-inspiring  height  the  majestic  central  dome.  The 
basilica  presents  in  the  apse  a  figure  of  the  horizon  from  which 
the  sun  of  righteousness  arises  in  his  glory ;  the  Byzantine 
building  unfolds  in  the  dome  a  figm'e  of  the  whole  vault  of 
heaven  in  sublime,  iniposing  majesty,  but  detracts  thereby 
from  the  prominence  of  tlie  altar,  and  leaves  for  it  only  a  j^lace 
of  subordinate  import." 

The  dome  is  not,  indeed,  absolutely  new.  The  Pantheon 
in  Eome,  whose  imposing  dome  has  a  diameter  of  a  hundred 
and  thirty-two  feet,  dates  from  the  age  of  Augustus,  b.  c.  26. 
But  here  the  dome  rises  on  a  circular  wall,  and  so  strikes  root 
in  the  earth,  altogether  in  character  with  the  heathen  religion. 
The  Byzantine  dome  rests  on  few  columns  connected  by 
ai'ches,  and,  like  the  vault  of  heaven,  freely  spans  the  central 
space  of  the  church  in  airy  lieight,  without  shutting  up  that 
space  by  walls. 

Around  the  main  central  dome '  stand  four  smaller  domes 
in  a  square,  and  upon  each  dome  rises  a  lofty  gilded  cross, 
which  in  the  earlier  churches  stands  upon  a  crescent,  himg 
with  all  sorts  of  chains,  and  fastened  by  these  to  the  dome. 

The  noblest  and  most  complete  building  of  this  kind  is  the 

the  church  of  St.  Sophia  in  architecture.  The  imperial  power,  as  absolute  autoc- 
racy, was  the  all-ruling,  all-moving  centre  of  the  whole  state  life.  The  main  dome, 
over-topping  all,  the  full  expression  of  the  majesty  of  the  centre,  towards  which  all 
parts  of  the  building  strove,  to  which  all  were  subservient,  in  the  splendor  of  wliich 
all  basked,  was  the  court  and  the  residence ;  on  it  the  provinces  and  the  authorities 
set  over  them  leaned,  as  the  subordinate  side-domes  or  half-domes  on  the  main 
one." 

'  ©o'Aoj. 


§    107.      THE  BYZANTINE   STYLE.  557 

renowned  cliurcli  of  St.  Sophia  at  Constantinople,  which  was 
erected  in  lavish  Asiatic  splendor  bj  the  emperor  Justinian 
after  a  plan  by  the  architects  Anthemius  of  Tralles  and  Isidore 
of  Miletus  (a.  d.  532-537),  and  consecrated  to  the  Eedeemer,' 
but  was  transformed  after  the  Turkish  conquest  into  a  Moham- 
medan mosque  (Aja  Sofia).  It  is  two  hundred  and  twenty- 
eight  feet  broad,  and  two  hundi'ed  and  fifty-two  feet  long; 
the  dome,  supported  by  four  gigantic  columns,  rises  a  hundred 
and  sixty-nine  feet  high  over  the  altar,  is  a  hundred  and  eight 
feet  in  diameter,  and  fioats  so  freely  and  airily  above  the  great 
central  space,  that,  in  the  language  of  the  Byzantine  court 
biographer  Procopius,  it  seems  not  to  rest  on  teiTa  firma,  but 
to  hang  from  heaven  by  golden  chains.^  The  most  costly 
material  was  used  in  the  building ;  the  Phrygian  marble  with 
rose-colored  and  white  veins,  the  dark  red  marble  of  the  Mle, 
the  green  of  Laconia,  the  black  and  white  spotted  of  the  Bos- 
phorus,  the  gold-colored  Libyan.  And  when  the  dome  re- 
flected the  brilliance  of  the  lighted  silver  chandeliers,  and  sent 
it  back  doubled  from  above,  it  might  well  remind  one  of  the 
vault  of  heaven  with  its  manifold  starry  glories,  and  account 
for  the  proud  satisfaction  with  which  Justinian  on  the  day  of 
the  consecration,  treading  in  solemn  procession  the  finished 
building,  exclaimed :  "  I  have  outdone  thee,  O  Solomon ! "  ^ 
The  church  of  St.  Sophia  stood  thenceforth  the  grand  model 

^  The  Wisdom,  the  Logos,  of  God ;  called  in  Proverbs  and  the  Book  of  Wisdom 
ao^'ia.  Hence  the  name  of  the  church.  There  is  still  standing  in  Constantinople  a 
small  church  of  St.  Sophia,  which  was  likewise  erected  by  Justinian. 

^  In  557,  the  32d  year  of  Justinian,  the  eastern  part  of  the  dome  fell  in,  and 
destroyed  the  altar,  together  with  the  tabernacle  and  the  ambo,  but  was  restored  in 
561.  A  similar  misfortune  befell  it  by  an  earthquake  in  the  twelfth  century,  and 
agamt  in  1346.  The  Turks  let  the  grand  structure  gradually  decay,  tUl  finally,  by 
command  of  the  Sultan,  a.  d.  1847-49,  a  thorough  restoration  was  undertaken 
under  the  direction  of  an  ItaUan  architect,  Fossati.  This  brought  to  light  the  mag- 
nificence of  the  Mosaic  pictures  which  Mohammedan  picture-hatred  and  Turkish 
barbarism  had  in  part  destroyed,  in  part  plastered  over.  The  Sultan  now  caused 
them  to  be  covered  with  plates  of  glass,  cemented  with  lime ;  so  that  they  are 
secure  for  a  time,  tiU  the  pile  shall  come  again  into  the  service  of  Christianity. 

^  NeviK-nKa.  ere  SoAojucir.  Comp.  the  descriptions  in  Evagrius :  Hist.  Eccl.  1.  iv. 
cap.  31 ;  Procopius:  De  aedific.  i.  1 ;  and  the  poem  of  Paul  SUentiarius:  ''EKcppa(ns 
vaov  Trjs  ay'ias  2o(f)ias  (a  metrical  translation  of  it  in  the  above  cited  work  of  Salzen- 
berg  and  Kortiim). 


558  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

of  the  new  Greek  architecture,  not  only  for  the  Christian  East 
and  the  Russian  church,  but  even  for  the  Mohammedans  in 
the  building  of  their  mosques. 

In  the  West  the  city  of  Ravenna,  on  the  Adriatic  coast, 
after  Honorius  (a.  d.  404)  the  seat  of  the  Western  empire,  or 
of  the  eparchate,  and  the  last  refuge  of  the  old  Roman  magnifi- 
cence and  art,  afibrds  beautiful  monuments  of  the  Byzantine 
style ;  especially  in  the  church  of  St.  Yitale,  which  was  erected 
by  the  bishop  Maximian  in  647.' 

In  the  West  the  ground  plan  of  the  basilica  was  usually 
retained,  with  pillars  and  entablature,  until  the  ninth  century, 
and  the  dome  and  vaultings  of  the  Byzantine  style  were  united 
with  it.  Out  of  this  union  arose  what  is  called  the  Roman- 
esque or  the  round-arch  style,  which  prevailed  from  the  tenth 
to  the  thirteenth  century,  and  was  then,  from  the  thirteenth  to 
the  fifteenth,  followed  by  the  Germanic  or  pointed-arch  style, 
with  its  gigantic  mastei'pieces,  the  Gothic  cathedrals-  From 
the  fifteenth  century  eclecticism  and  confusion  prevailed  in 
architecture,  till  the  modern  attempts  to  reproduce  the  ancient 
style.  The  Oriental  church,  on  the  contrary,  has  never  gone 
beyond  the  Byzantine,  its  productivity  almost  entirely  ceasing 
with  the  age  of  Justinian.  But  it  is  possible  that  the  Grseco 
Russian  church  will  in  the  future  develop  something  new. 


§  108.     Bajptisteries.     Gra've- Chapels  and  Crypts. 

Baptisteries  or  Photistekies,*  chapels  designed  exclusively 
for  the  administration  of  baptism,  are  a  form  of  church  build- 
ing by  themselves.  In  the  first  centuries  baptism  was  per- 
^  /  formed  on  streams  in  the  open  air,  or  in  private  houses.  But 
I  /  /  after  the  public  exj^ercise  of  Christian  worship  became  lawful, 
in  the  fourth  century  special  buildings  for  this  holy  ordinance 
began  to  appear,  either  entirely  separate,  or  connected  with 

*  Comp.  on  these  Byzantine  churches  Kinkel,  1.  c,  i.  p.  100  sqq.  and  p.  121  sqq., 
and  the  splendid  work  of  Salzenberg  and  Kortiim,  Altchristliche  Baudenkmale  Kon- 
Btantinopels,  etc. 

^  *aiTto-Ti/7pia,  places  of  enlightening ;  because  the  baptized  were,  according  to 
Heb.  vi.  4,  called  "  enlightened." 


§   108.      BAPTISTEEIES.      GEAVE-CHAPELS   AND   CETPTS.       559 

tlie  main  cliurcli  (at  the  side  of  the  "western  main  entrance)  by 
a  covered  passage ;  and  they  were  generally  dedicated  to  John 
the  Baptist.  The  need  of  them  arose  partly  from  the  still  prev- 
alent custom  of  immersion,  partly  from  the  fact  that  the  num- 
ber of  candidates  often  amounted  to  hundreds  and  thousands ; 
since  baptism  was  at  that  time  administered,  as  a  rule,  only 
three  or  four  times  a  year,  on  the  eve  of  the  great  festivals 
(Easter,  Pentecost,  Epiphany,  and  Christmas),  and  at  episcopal 
sees,  while  the  church  proper  was  filled  with  the  praying  con- 
gregation. 

These  baptismal  chapels  were  not  oblong,  like  the  basihcas, 
but  round  (like  most  of  the  Homan  temples),  and  commonly 
covered  with  a  dome.  They  had  in  the  centre,  like  the  bath- 
ing and  swimming  houses  of  the  Eoman  watering  places,  a 
large  baptismal  basin,'  into  which  several  steps  descended. 
Around  this  stood  a  colonnade  and  a  circular  or  polygonal  gal- 
lery for  spectators ;  and  before  the  main  entrance  there  was  a 
spacious  vestibule  in  the  form  of  an  entirely  walled  rectangle 
or  oval.  Generally  the  baptisteries  had  two  divisions  for  the 
two  sexes.  The  interior  was  sumptuously  ornamented ;  espe- 
cially the  font,  on  wliich  was  frequently  represented  the  sym- 
bolical figure  of  a  hart  panting  for  the  brook,  or  a  lamb,  or 
the  baptism  of  Christ  by  John.  The  earliest  baptistery,  of  the 
Constantinian  church  of  St.  Peter  in  E,ome,  whose  living  flood 
was  supplied  from  a  foimtain  of  the  Vatican  hill,  was  adorned 
with  beautiful  mosaic,  the  gi^een,  gold,  and  pm-ple  of  which 
were  reflected  in  the  water.  The  most  celebrated  existing 
baptistery  is  that  of  the  Lateran  church  at  Eome,  the  original 
plan  of  which  is  ascribed  to  Constantino,  but  has  undergone 
changes  in  the  process  of  time.° 

After  the  sixth  century,  when  the  baptism  of  adults  had 
become  rare,  it  became  customary  to  place  a  baptismal  basin 
in  the  porch  of  the  church,  or  in  the  church  itself,  at  the  left 
of  the  entrance,  and,  after  baptism  came  to  be  administered  no 

'  Ko\ofj.$ribpa,  piscina,  fons  baptismalis. 

^  In  it,  according  to  tradition,  the  emperor  received  baptism  from  pope  Silvester 
I.  But  this  must  be  an  error ;  for  Constantine  did  not  receive  baptism  until  he  wad 
on  his  death- bed  in  Nicomedia.     Comp.  §  2,  above. 


660  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

longer  by  tlie  bishop  alone,  but  by  every  pastor,  each  parish 
church  contained  such  an  arrangement.  Still  baptisteries  also 
continued  in  use,  and  even  in  the  later  middle  ages  new  ones 
were  occasionally  erected. 

Finally,  after  the  time  of  Constantino  it  became  customary 
to  erect  small  houses  of  worship  or  memorial  chapels  U23on  the 
burial-places  of  the  martyrs,  and  to  dedicate  them  to  their 
memory.'  These  served  more  especially  for  private  edifica- 
tion. 

The  subterranean  chapels,  or  ceypts,  were  connected  with 
the  churches  built  over  them,  and  brought  to  mind  the  worship 
of  the  catacombs  in  the  times  of  persecution.  Tliese  crypts 
always  produce  a  most  earnest,  solemn  impression,  and  many 
of  them  are  of  considerable  archaeological  interest. 


§  109.     Crosses  and  Crucifixes. 

Jao.  Geetseb  (R.  C.)  :  De  cruce  Ohristi.  2  vols.  Ingolst.  1608.  Just. 
LiPsiTJs:  De  cruce  Ohristi.  Antv.  1694.  Fr.  Munter:  Die  Sinnbil- 
der  u.  Kunstvorstellungen  der  alten  Christen.  Altona,  1825.  0.  J. 
Hefele  (R.  0.) :  Alter  u.  iilteste  Form  der  Crucifixe  (in  the  2d  vol. 
of  his  Beitriige  zur  Kirchengesch.,  Archaologie  u.  Liturgik.  Tubingen, 
1864,  p.  265  sqq.).  ^ •^^t-^-^i^'^u^^^fU^ 

The  CKOss,  as  the  symbol  of  redemption,  and  the  signing  of 
the  cross  upon  the  forehead,  the  eyes,  the  mouth,  the  breast, 
and  even  upon  parts  of  clothing,  were  in  universal  use  in  this 
period,  as  they  had  been  even  in  the  second  century,  both  in 
private  Christian  life  and  in  public  worship.  They  were  also 
in  many  ways  abused  in  the  service  of  superstition ;  and  the 
nickname  cross-worshvppers^  which  the  heathen  applied  to  the 
Christians  in  the  time  of  Tertullian/  was  in  many  cases  not 

'  Hence  the  name  ixaprvpta,  marfyrum  mcmorice,  confessio7ies.  The  clergy  who 
officiated  in  them  were  called  k\t}piko\  /j-aprvpiwy,  martyrarii.  The  name  capellce 
occurs  first  in  the  seventh  and  eighth  centuries,  and  is  commonly  derived  from  the 
cappa  (a  clerical  vestment  covering  the  head  and  body)  of  St.  Martin  of  Tours, 
which  was  preserved  and  carried  about  as  a  precious  relic  and  as  a  national  palla- 
dium of  France. 

"  Rehgiosi  crucis. 

'  Tert.  Apolog.  c.  16. 


€^^\/tf\  ^^' 


Xj^  ^^X^^Af's^rV''^^ 


§   109.      CROSSES  AND   CEFCIFIXES.  561 

entii'ely  unwarranted.  Besides  simple  wooden  crosses,  now 
that  the  church  had  risen  to  the  kingdom,  there  were  many 
crosses  of  silver  and  gold,  or  sumptuonsly  set  with  pearls  and 
gems.' 

The  conspicuous  part  which,  according  to  the  statements 
of  Eusebius,  the  cross  played  in  the  life  of  Constantino,  is  well 
known :  forming  the  instrument  of  his  conversion ;  borne  by 
fifty  men,  leading  him  to  his  victories  over  Maxentius  and 
Liciuius ;  inscribed  upon  his  banners,  upon  the  weapons  of  his 
soldiers  in  his  palace,  and  upon  public  places,  and  lying  in  the 
right  hand  of  his  own  statue.  Shortly  afterwards  Julian 
accused  the  Christians  of  worshipping  the  wood  of  the  cross. 
"The  sign  of  universal  detestation,"  says  Chrysostom,*  "the 
sign  of  extreme  penalty,  is  now  become  the  object  of  universal 
desire  and  love.  We  see  it  everywhere  triumphant ;  we  find 
it  on  houses,  on  roofs,  and  on  walls,  in  cities  and  hamlets,  on 
the  markets,  along  the  roads,  and  in  the  deserts,  on  the  moun- 
tains and  in  the  valleys,  on  the  sea,  on  ships,  on  books  and 
weapons,  on  garments,  in  marriage  chambers,  at  banquets, 
upon  gold  and  silver  vessels,  in  pearls,  in  painting  upon  walls, 
on  beds,  on  the  bodies  of  very  sick  animals,  on  the  bodies  of 
the  possessed  [ — to  drive  away  the  disease  and  the  demon — ], 
at  the  dances  of  the  meiTy,  and  in  the  brotherhoods  of  ascet- 
ics." Besides  this,  it  was  usual  to  mark  the  cross  on  windows 
and  floors,  and  to  wear  it  upon  the  forehead.^  According  to 
Augustine  this  sign  was  to  remind  believers  that  their  calling 
is  to  follow  Christ  in  true  humility,  through  sufiering,  into 
glory. 

We  might  speak  in  the  same  way  of  the  use  of  other  Chris- 
tian emblems  from  the  sphere  of  natm-e;  the  representation 
of  Christ  by  a  good  sliepherd,  a  lamb,  a  fish,  and  the  like, 

'  The  cross  occurs  in  three  forms :  the  crux  decussata  x  (called  St.  Andrew's 
cross,  because  this  apostle  is  said  to  have  died  upon  such  an  one) ;  the  crux  com- 
missa  X ;  and  the  oiix  immissa,  either  with  equal  arms  +  (the  Greek  cross),  or  with 
unequal  f  (the  Roman),  k^ 

^  In  the  homily  on  the  divinity  of  Christ,  §  9,  torn.  i.  5*71. 

'  'EfCTUTToC;/  rhv  (TTavpbv  cV  rw  fxerwircf,  effingere  crucem  in  fronte,  postare  in 
fronte,  which  cannot  always  be  understood  as  merely  making  the  sign  with  tho 
finger  on  the  forehead.     Comp.  Neander,  iii.  547,  note. 
VOL.  II. — 36 


662  THIKD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-690. 

wMcli  we    have    already    observed    in    the   period    preced- 
ing.' 

Towards  the  end  of  the  present  period  we  for  the  first  time 
meet  with  cvucifixes;  that  is,  crosses  not  bare,  but  with  the 
figure  of  the  crucified  Saviour  upon  them.  The  transition  to 
the  crucifix  we  find  in  the  fifth  century  in  the  figure  of  a  lamb, 
or  even  a  bust  of  Christ,  attached  to  the  cross,  sometimes  at  the 
top,  sometimes  at  the  bottom.^  Afterwards  the  whole  figure 
of  Christ  was  fastened  to  the  cross,  and  the  earlier  forms  gave 
place  to  this.  The  Trullan  council  of  Constantinople  (the 
Quinisextum),  a.  d.  692,  directed  in  the  82d  canon :  "  Here- 
after, instead  of  the  lamb,  the  human  figure  of  Christ  shall  be 
set  up  on  the  images."'  But  subsequently  the  orthodox 
church  of  the  East  prohibited  all  plastic  images,  crucifixes 
among  them,  and  it  tolerates  only  pictures  of  Christ  and  the 
saints.  The  earlier  Latin  crucifixes  offend  the  taste  and  dis- 
turb devotion ;  but  the  Catholic  art  in  its  flourishing  period 
succeeded  in  combining,  in  the  figure  of  the  suffering  and  dying 
Redeemer,  the  expression  of  the  deepest  and  holiest  anguish 
with  that  of  supreme  dignity.  In  the  middle  age  there  was 
frequently  added  to  the  crucifix  a  group  of  Mary,  John,  a  sol- 
dier, and  the  penitent  Magdalene,  who  on  her  knees  embraced 
the  post  of  the  cross.  j  .      .  />^  ' 

^      >  Vol.  i.  §  100  (p.  STY  sqq.). 

*  Crosses  of  this  sort,  colored  red,  with  a  white  lamb,  are  thus  described  by 
Paulinus  of  Nola  in  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century,  Epist.  32 : 

"Sub  cruce  sanguinea  niveo  stat  Christus  in  agno." 
^  Kora  T'bv  av^pwirifov  xapoKT^po.  Hefele  (1.  c.  266  sq.)  proves  .that  crucifixes 
did  not  make  their  first  appearance  with  this  council,  but  that  some  existed  before.  ^ 
I  The  Venerable  Bede,  for  example  (Opp;  ed.  Giles,  torn.  iv.  p.  3V6),  relates  that  a 
crucifix,  bearmg  on  one  side  the  Crucified,  on  the  other  the  serpent  lifted  up  by 
Moses,  was  brought  from  Rome  to  the  British  cloister  of  Weremouth  in  686. 
Gregory  of  Tours,  also  (f  595),  De  gloria  martyrum,  lib.  i.  c.  23,  describes  a  crucifix 
in  the  church  of  St.  Gcnesius  in  Narbonne,  which  presented  the  Crucified  One  almost 
entirely  naked  (pictura,  quae  Dominum  nostrum  quasi  prsecinctum  linteo  indicat  cru- 
cifixum).  But  this  crucifix  gave  ofience,  and  was  veiled,  by  order  of  the  bishop, 
with  a  curtain,  and  only  at  times  exposed  tp  the  people. 


'.f^itf^   rr^n 


L 


'"'Jo.  Q^AVJ^,- 


7 


I 


fl^'X  -^  -^V  ^"^  'H'jW^"^*'^    ^ 


«A<V-<*i  ii;   J. : 


_j -.     ^^'^^    '  nil'"''    '■  ^  ''^'  ''      ^    '   J.      /-^         ' 


•-/^ 


{5^v 


^(.'3 


^^v^ 


:-.vo  jw-^ 


^f  ft^  «u**t{  ^ 


^- 


i 


^'^ 


^^>t<rM  c*^..y,x;,jC^  /-rtYVViV^^t^  'TlT^^  /«4^^  '**«^  tJ^«*^*^#^«*^«^/'*«»^*5^ 


§   110.      IMAGES   OF   CHRIST.  563 

§  110.    Images  of  Christ. 

Fr.  Kuglee  :  Handbuch  der  Geschichte  der  Malerei  seit  Constantin  dem  Gr. 
Berlin,  1847,  2  vols. ;  and  other  works  on  the  history  of  painting. 
Also  0.  Geuneisen  :  Die  bildliche  Darstellung  der  Gottheit.  Stuttgart 
1828.  On  the  Iconoclastic  controversies,  comp,  Maimboueg  (E.  C.)  .- 
Histoire  de  I'heresie  de  I'Iconoclastes.  Par.  1G79  sqq.  2  vols.  Cal- 
lous (Calvinist) :  De  imaginibus.  Lugd.  Bat.  1642.  Fe.  Spanheim  : 
nistoria  imaginum  restituta.  Lngd.  Bat.  1686.  P.  E.  Jabloxski 
(t  1757):  De  origine  imaginum  Christi  Domini,  in  Opuscul.  ed.  Water,  /L  r  A^) 
Lugd.  Bat.  1804,  tom.  iii.  "Walch:  Ketzergesch.,  vols.  x.  and  si.  J.-"^  ^  "^ 
Maex:  Der  Bildersturm  der  byzantinisch en  Kaiser.  Trier,  1839.  TT. 
.,  Geemm:  Die^age  vom  Ursprunge  der  Chrispisbilder,  Berlin,  184l./-£ty'.  **^^^j^ 

A'-a/^at.    GLUOKSEn^.r  Christus-Archaologie.  Prag,  T.86^.     Hefele:   Beitriige   u       k 
uSet^&»fi<2uv  Kirchengeschichte,  vol.  ii.  Tub.  1864  (Christusbilder,  p.  254  sqq.).-/'''^'  "4^?^— 
^9*^^^  Comp.  the  liter,  in  Ease's  Leben  Jesu,  p.  79  (5th  ed.  1865).  oua  t^o^j  ^^' 

a.oj  '  taMx,  :  cJAjt^ti. 

*  While  the  temple  of  Solomon  left  to  the  Christian  mind  uo^^^  aw-tari. 

doubt  concerning  the  lawfulness   and  usefulness  of  chuichj^^^^^^g^j, 
architecture,  the  second  commandment  seemed  dii'ectly  to  for-  ^i^  uirrvv  c^/f 
bid  a  Christian  painting  or  sculpture.     "The  primitive  church,"  ivU:  {•v^/**  UL* 
Bays  even  a  modern  Koman  Catholic  historian,'  "  had  no  images  Cuttici*^) .  2^ 
of  Christ,  since  most  Christians  at  that  time  still  adhered  to  /-' 
the  commandment  of  Moses  (Ex.  xx.  4) ;  the  more,  that  regard     ■-- " 
as  well  to  the  Gentile  Christians  as  to  the  Jewish  forbade  all  2.  ircn^ . 
use  of  images.     To  the  latter  the  exhibition  and  veneration  of 
images  would,  of  course,  be  an  abomination,  and  to  the  newly 
converted  heathen  it  might  be  a  temptation  to  relapse  into 
idolatry.     In  addition,  the  church  was  obliged,  for  her  own 
honor,  to  abstain  from  images,  particularly  from  any  represen- 
tation of  the  Lord,  lest  she  should  be  regarded  by  unbelievers 
as  merely  a  new  kind  and  special  sort  of  heathenism  and  crea- 
ture-worship.    And  further,  the  early  Christians  had  in  their 
idea  of  the  bodily  form  of  the  Lord  no  temptation,  not  the 
slightest  incentive,  to  make  likenesses   of  Christ.     The   op- 
pressed church  conceived  its  Master  only  under  the  foirm  of  a 
servant,  despised  and  uncomely,  as  Isaiah,  liii.  2,  3,  describes 
the  Servant  of  the  Lord." 
"^.C-  V      The  first  representations  of  Christ  are  of  heretical  and  pagan 

»  Hefele,  1.  c.  p.  254. 


\ 


564  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-690. 

origin.  The  Gnostic  sect  of  tlie  Carpoeratians  worsliipped 
crowned  pictures  of  Christ,  together  with  images  of  PythagO' 
ras,  Plato,  Aristotle,  and  other  sages,  and  asserted  that  Pilate 
had  caused  a  portrait  of  Christ  to  be  made.'  In  the  same 
spirit  of  pantheistic  hero-worship  the  emperor  Alexander  Seve- 
rus  (a.  d.  222 — 235)  set  up  in  his  domestic  chapel  for  his  adora- 
tion the  images  of  Abraham,  Orpheus,  Apollonius,  and  Christ!)  ^ 

After  Constantine,  the  first  step  towards  images  in  the 
orthodox  church  was  a  change  in  the  conception  of  the  out- 
ward form  of  Christ.     The  persecuted  church  had  filled  its  eye 
with  the  humble  and  suffering  servant-form  of  Jesus,  and  found 
*      therein  consolation  and  strength  in  her  tribulation.     The  vic- 
torious church  saw  the  same  Lord  in  heavenly  glory  on  the. 
right  hand  of  the  Father,  niling  over  his  enemies.     The  one  .... 
conceived  Christ  in  his  state  of  humiliation  (but  not  in  his  state  '  ' 
of  exaltation),  as  even  repulsive,  or  at  least  "having  no  form    ' 
nor  comeliness;"   taking  too  literally  the  description  of  the 
A  ci*^(L  ^^       suffering  servant  of  God  in  Is.  lii.  14  and  liii.  2,  Zf    The  other 
/tiH<^  '^(■fr*^'^  beheld  in  him  the  ideal  of  human  beauty,  "fairer  than  the 

^^£^H.' .  ^     childi-en  of  men,"  with  "grace  poured  into  his  lips ; "  after  the 

Messianic  interpretation  of  Ps.  xlv.  Z^f^  ~^'~~~ " 

^  Irenaeus,  Adv.  beer.  1,  25,  §  6:  "Imagines  quasdam  quidem  depictas,  quasdam 
autem  et  de  reliqua  materia  fabricatas  babent,  dicentes  formam  Cbristi  factam  a 
PUato  Ulo  in  tempore,  quo  fuit  Jesus  cum  bominibus.  Et  bas  coronant  et  propo- 
nunt  eas  cum  imaginibus  mundi  pbilosopborum,  videlicet  cum  imagine  Pytbagorae  et 
Platonis  et  Aristoteliset  reliquorum ;  et  rebquam  observationem  circa  eas,  similiter 
'"'^-v^  ut  gentes,  faciunt."^^Tomp.  Epipbanius,  Adv.  bser.  xxvL  no.  6 ;  August.,  De  baer. 

f>      '  /J/)'      ^  ^°  Justin  Martyr,  Dial.  c.  Trypb. ;  Clement.  Alex.,  in  several  places  of  tbe 

^  Pasdagogus  and  tbe  Stromata ;  TertuUian,  De  carne  Cbristi,  c.  9,  and  Adv.  Jud.  c. 
14 ;  and  Origen,  Contra  Cels.  vi.  c.  YS.  Celsus  made  tbis  low  conception  of  tbe 
form  of  tbe  founder  of  tlieir  religion  one  of  bis  reproacbes  against  tbe  Chris- 
tians. Ort*>^  .  e^.X.  ^-  /OT^,^.  S/g. 
^  ^  So  Cbrysostom,  Homil.  27  (al.  28)  in  Mattb.  (tom.  vii.  p.  371,  in  tbe  new  Paris 
ed.):  Ovh\  yap  bavixarovpyav  ^v  bavfiacr-ros  ixovov,  aWh.  Koi  <paiv6ixevo%  airXlhs  ttoWiis 
eytiUe  xipiTOS  '  Kal  tovto  6  irpo(priT7]^  (Ps.  xlv.)  StjAwv  tXeyev  wptuos  KciWfi  irapa 
Tovs  vlovi  Twv  av^puiiruv.  Tbe  passage  in  Isaiab  (liii.  2)  be  refers  to  tbe  ignominy 
vrbicb  Cbrist  suffered  on  tbe  cross.  So  also  Jerome,  wbo  bkewise  refers  Ps.  xlv.  to 
tbe  personal  appearance  of  Jesus,  and  says  of  bim :  "  Absque  passionibus  crucis 
universis  [bominibus]  pulcbrior  est.  .  .  .  Nisi  enim  habuisset  et  in  vultu  quid- 
dam  oculisque  sidereum,  numquam  cum  statim  secuti  fuissent  apostoli,  nee  qui  ad 
comprebendendum  cum  venerant.  corruissent  (Jno.  xviii.)."    Hierou.  Ep.  65,  c.  8. 


l'„'r^Cy  aia^  9.11 


^^w'  '^ 


,  §    110.      IMAGES   OF   CHRIST.  565 

This^alone,,^i:02gfiSE3^  did  not  warrant  images  of  Ghri&t.  ^^^^.^/.^^^ 
Far,  in  the  first  pl^it^i^  authentic  ajsdQiints  of  the  perserral  ap-    ^^ 
pearSmce  of  Jesus  WOTe  lacking ';   and.  furthermore  it  seekied 
inconiWjtent  to  human  art  duly  to  set  fo"vth  Him  in  Whom  the 
whole  fixlnegs  of  the  Gocliipdd  and  of  permoJ^sinless  humanity 
dwelt  in  \tnity. 

•  On  this  point  two  opposite  tendencies  developed  themselves, 
giving  occasion  in  time  to  the  violent  and  protracted  image- 
controversies,  until,  at  the  seventh  ecumenical  council  at  Nic^   M.  il^ 
in.  787,  the  use  and  adoration  of  images  carried  the  day  in  the 
church. 

1.  On  the  one  side,  tlie  prejudices  of  the  ante-Nicene  period 
against  images  in  painting  or  sculptm*e  continued  alive, 
through  fear  of  approach  to  pagan'  idolatry,  or  of  lowering 
Christianity  into  the  province  of  sense.  But  generally  the 
hostility  was  directed  only  against  images  of  Christ ;  and  from 
it,  as  Neander  justly  observes,^  we  are  hj  no  means  to  infer 
the  rejection  of  all  representations  of  religious  subjects;  for 
images  of  Christ  encounter  objections  peculiar  to  themselves. 

The  church  historian  Eusebius  declared  himself  in  the 
strongest  manner  against  images  of  Christ  in  a  letter  to  the 
empress  Constantia  (the  widow  of  Licinius  and  sister  of  Con- 
stantino), who  had  asked  him  for  such  an  image.  Christ,  says 
he,  has  laid  aside  His  earthly  servant-form,  and  Paul  exhorts 
us  to  cleave  no  longer  to  the  sensible ;  '^  and  the  transcendent 
glory  of  His  heavenly  body  cannot  be  conceived  nor  repre- 
sented by  man ;  besides,  the  second  commandment  forbids  the 
making  to  ourselves  any  likeness  of  anything  in  heaven  or  in 
earth.  He  had  taken  away  from  a  lady  an  image  of  Christ 
and  of  Paul,  lest  it  should  seem  as  if  Christians,  like  the  idola- 
ters, carried  their  God  about  in  images.  Believers  ought 
rather  to  fix  their  mental  eye,  above  all,  upon  the  divinity  of 
Christ,  and,  for  this  purpose,  to  purify  their  hearts ;  since  only 
the  pure  in  heart  shall  see  God.'     The  same  Eusebius,  how- 

'  Kirchengesch.,  vol.  iii.  p.  550  (Germ.  ed.). 

=  Comp.  2  Cor.  v,  16. 

^  In  Harduin,  Collect,  concil.  torn.  iv.  p.  406.  A  fragment  of  this  letter  of  Euse- 
bius is  preserved  in  the  acts  of  the  council  of  the  Iconoclasts  at  Constantinople  in 
•754,  and  in  the  sixth  act  of  the  second  council  of  Xice  in  787. 


566  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

ever,  relates  of  Constantine,  without  tlie  slightest  disapproval, 
that,  in  his  Christian  zeal,  he  caused  the  public  monuments  in 
the  forum  of  the  new  imperial  city  to  be  adorned  with  sym- 
bolical representations  of  Christ,  to  wit,  with  figures  of  the 
good  Shepherd  and  of  Daniel  in  the  lion's  den/  He  likewise 
tells  us,  that  the  woman  of  the  issue  of  blood,  after  her  mirac- 
ulous cure  (Matt.  ix.  20),  and  out  of  gratitude  for  it,  erected 
before  her  dwelling  in  Caesarea  Philippi  (Paneas)  two  brazen 
statues,  the  figure  of  a  kneeling  woman,  and  of  a  venerable 
man  (Christ)  extending  his  hand  to  help  her,  and  that  he  had 
seen  these  statues  with  his  own  eyes  at  Paneas.^  In  the  same 
]3lace  he  speaks  also  of  pictm^es  (probably  Carpocratian)  of 
Christ  and  the  apostles  Peter  and  Paul,  which  he  had  seen, 
and  observes  that  these  cannot  be  wondered  at  in  those  who 
were  formerly  heathen,  and  who  had  been  accustomed  to  testify 
their  gratitude  towards  their  benefactors  in  this  way. 

The  narrow  fanatic  Epiphanius  of  Cyprus  (f  403)  also  seems 
to  have  been  an  opponent  of  images.  For  when  he  saw  the 
picture  of  Christ  or  a  saint '  on  the  altar-curtain  in  Anablatha, 
a  \'illage  of  Palestine,  he  tore  away  the  curtain,  because  it  was 
contrary  to  the  Scriptures  to  hang  up  the  picture  of  a  man  in 
the  church,  and  he  advised  the  officers  to  use  the  cloth  for 
winding  the  corpse  of  some  poor  person.*  This  arbitrary  con- 
duct, however,  excited  great  indignation,  and  Epiphanius 
found  himself  obliged  to  restore  the  injury  to  the  village 
church  by  another  curtain. 

2.  The  prevalent  spirit  of  the  age  already  very  decidedly 

'  Yita  Const,  iii.  c.  49. 

-  Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  vii.  cap.  18.  According  to  Philostorgius  (vii.  3),  it  was  for  a 
long  time  unknown  whom  the  statues  at  Paneas  represented,  until  a  medicinal  plant 
was  discovered  at  their  feet,  and  then  they  were  transferred  to  the  sacristy.  The 
emperor  Julian  destroyed  them,  and  substituted  his  outi  statue,  which  was  riven  by 
lightning  (Sozom.  v.  21).  Probably  that  statue  of  Christ  was  a  monument  of  Ha- 
drian or  some  other  emperor,  to  whom  the  Phenicians  did  obeisance  in  the  form  of 
a  kneeling  woman.  Similar  representations  are  to  be  seen  upon  coins,  particularly 
of  the  time  of  Hadrian. 

^  "  Imaginem  quasi  Christi  vel  sancti  cujusdam." 

*  Epiph.  Ep.  ad  Joann.  Hierosolym.,  which  Jerome  has  preserved  in  a  Latin 
translation.  The  Iconoclastic  council  at  Constantinople  in  '754  cited  several  works 
of  Epiphanius  against  images,  the  genuineness  of  which,  however,  is  suspicious. 


§   110.       IMAGES   OF   CHKIST.  567 

favored  this  material  representation  as  a  powerful  help  to  vir- 
tue and  devotion,  especially  for  the  uneducated  classes,  whence 
the  use  of  images,  in  fact,  mainly  proceeded. 

Plastic  representation,  it  is  true,  was  never  popular  in  the 
East.  The  Greek  church  tolerates  no  statues,  and  forbids  even 
crucifixes.  Li  the  West,  too,  in  this  period,  sculpture  occurs 
almost  exclusively  in  has  relief  and  high  relief,  particularly  on 
sarcophagi,  and  in  carvings  of  ivory  and  gold  in  church  decora- 
tions. Sculpture,  from  its  more  finite  nature,  lies  farther  from 
Christianity  than  the  other  arts. 

Painting,  on  the  contrary,  was  almost  universally  drawn 
into  the  service  of  religion';  and  that,  not  primarily  from  the 
artistic  impulse  which  developed  itself  afterwards,  but  from 
the  practical  necessity  of  having  objects  of  devout  reverence  in 
concrete  form  before  the  eye,  as  a  substitute  for  the  sacred 
books,  which  were  accessible  to  the  educated  alone.  Akin  to 
this  is  the  universal  pleasure  of  children  in  pictures. 

The  church-teachers  approved  and  defended  this  demand, 
though  they  themselves  did  not  so  directly  need  such  helps. 
In  fact,  later  tradition  traced  it  back  to  apostolic  times,  and 
saw  in  the  Evangelist  Luke  the  first  sacred  painter.  Whereof 
only  so  much  is  true :  that  he  has  sketched  in  his  Gospel 
and  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  vivid  and  faithful  pictures  of 
the  Lord,  His  mother,  and  His  disciples,  which  are  surely  of 
infinitely  greater  value  than  all  pictures  in  color  and  statues 
in  marble.' 

Basil  the  Great  (f  379)  says :  "  I  confess  the  appearance  of 
the  Son  of  God  in  the  flesh,  and  the  holy  Mary  as  the  mother 
of  God,  who  bore  Him  according  to  the  flesh.  And  I  receive 
also  the  holy  apostles  and  prophets  and  martyi'S.  Tlieir  like- 
nesses I  revere  and  kiss  with  homage,  for  they  are  handed 
down  from  the  holy  apostles,  and  are  not  forbidden,  but  on  tlie 
contrary  painted  in  all  our  churches." "     His  brother,  Gregory 

'  Jerome,  in  his  biograplaical  sketch  of  Luke,  De  viris  illustr  c.  '7,  is  silent 
concerning  this  tradition  (which  did  not  arise  till  the  seventh  century  or  later),  and 
speaks  of  Luke  merely  as  medicus,  according  to  Col.  iv.  4. 

'^  Epist.  205.  Comp.  his  Oratio  in  Barlaam,  0pp.  i.  515,  and  similar  expressions 
in  Gregory  Naz.,  Orat.  19  (al.  18). 


568  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

of  Njssa,  also,  in  his  memorial  discom'se  on  tlie  martyr  Theo- 
dore, speaks  in  praise  of  sacred  painting,  which  "  is  wont  to 
speak  silentlj  from  the  walls,  and  thus  to  do  mnch  good." 
The  bishop  Paulinus  of  Nola,  who  caused  biblical  pictures  to 
be  exhibited  annually  at  the  festival  seasons  in  the  church  of 
St.  Felix,  thought  that  by  them  the  scenes  of  the  Bible  were 
made  clear  to  the  uneducated  rustic,  as  they  could  not  other- 
wise be ;  impressed  themselves  on  his  memory,  awakened  in 
him  holy  thoughts  and  feelings,  and  restrained  him  from  all 
kinds  of  vice.*  The  bishop  Leon  tins  of  Neapolis  in  Cyprus, 
who  at  the  close  of  the  sixth  century  wrote  an  apology  for 
Christianity  against  the  Jews,  and  in  it  noticed  the  charge  of 
idolatry,  asserts  that  the  law  of  Moses  is  du-ected  not  uncondi- 
tionally against  the  use  of  religious  images,  but  only  against 
the  idolatrous  worship  of  them ;  since  the  tabernacle  and  the 
temple  themselves  contained  cherubim  and  other  figures ;  and 
he  advocates  images,  especially  for  their  beneficent  influences. 
"In  almost  all  the  world,"  says  he,  "profligate  men,  murder- 
ers, robbers,  debauchees,  idolaters,  are  daily  moved  to  contri- 
tion by  a  look  at  the  cross  of  Christ,  and  led  to  renounce  the 
world,  and  practise  every  virtue."  ^  And  Leontius  already 
ajDpcals  to  the  miraculous  fact,  that  blood  flowed  from  many 
of  the  images.' 

Owing  to  the  difficulty,  already  noticed,  of  worthily  repre- 
senting Christ  Himself,  the  first  subjects  were  such  scenes 
from  the  Old  Testament  as  formed  a  typical  prophecy  of  the 
history  of  the  Redeemer.  Thus  the  first  step  from  the  field  of 
nature,  whence  the  earliest  sj^mbols  of  Christ — the  lamb,  the 
fish,  the  shepherd — were  drawn,  was  into  the  field  of  pre-Chris- 
tian revelation,  and  thence  it  was  another  step  into  the  prov- 
ince of  gospel  history  itself.  The  favorite  pictures  of  this  kind 
were,  the  offering-up  of  Isaac — the  pre-figuration  of  the  great 

*  Paulinus,  Carmen  ix.  et  x.  de  S.  Felicis  natali. 

-  See  the  fragments  of  this  apology  in  the  4th  act  of  the  second  council  of  Xicaja, 
and  Neander,  iii.  560  (2d  Germ,  ed.),  who  adds  the  unprejudiced  remark :  "  We  can- 
not doubt  that  what  Leontius  here  says,  though  rhetorically  exaggerated,  is  never- 
theless drawn  from  life,  and  is  founded  on  impressions  actually  produced  by  the 
contemplation  of  images  in  certain  states  of  feeling." 


§   110.       IMAGES    OF   CHKIST.  569 

sacrifice  on  the  cross;  tlie  miracle  of  Moses  drawing  forth 
water  from  the  rock  with  his  rod — which  was  interpreted 
either,  according  to  1  Cor.  x.  4,  of  Christ  Himself,  or,  more 
especially  and  frequently,  of  the  birth  of  Christ  from  the 
womb  of  the  Virgin ;  the  suffering  Job — a  type  of  Christ  in 
His  deepest  humiliation ;  Daniel  in  the  lion's  den — the  symbol 
of  the  Redeemer  subduing  the  devil  and  death  in  the  under- 
world ;  the  miraculous  deliverance  of  the  prophet  Jonah  from 
the  whale's  belly — foreshadowing  the  resurrection ;  ^  and  the 
translation  of  Elijah — foreshadowing  the  ascension  of  Christ. 

About  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century,  just  when  the  doc- 
trine of  the  person  of  Christ  reached  its  formal  settlement,  the 
first  representations  of  Christ  Himself  appeared,  even  said  by 
tradition  to  be  faithful  portraits  of  the  original.*  From  that 
time  the  difficulty  of  representing  the  God-Man  was  removed 
by  an  actual  representation,  and  the  recognition  of  the  images 
of  Christ,  especially  of  the  Madonna  with  the  Child,  became 
even  a  test  of  orthodoxy,  as  against  the  Nestorian  heresy  of  an 
abstract  separation  of  the  two  natures  in  Christ.  In  the  sixth 
century,  according  to  the  testimony  of  Gregory  of  Tours,  pic- 
tures of  Christ  were  hung  not  only  in  churches,  but  in  almost 
every  private  house.^ 

Among  these  representations  of  Christ  there  are  two  dis- 
tinct types  received  in  the  church  : 

(1)  The  Salvatok  picture,  with  the  expression  of  calm 
serenity  and  dignity,  and  of  heavenly  gentleness,  without  the 
faintest  mark  of  OTief.  Accordino'  to  the  leo-end,  this  was  a 
portrait,  miraculously  imprinted  on  a  cloth,  which  Christ  Him- 
self presented  to  Abgarus,  king  of  Edessa,  at  his  request.*     The 

'  Comp.  Matt.  xii.  39,  40, 

'  The  image-hating  Nestorians  ascribed  the  origin  of  iconolatry  to  their  hated 
opponent,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  and  put  it  into  connection  with  the  Monophysite 
^^esx  (Assem.,  Bibl.  orient,  iii.  2,  p.  401). 
'^  De  gloria  ma'l-tyrum,  lib.  i.  c.  22.      '    "' 

*  First  mentioned  by  the  Armenian  historian  Moses  of  Chorene  in  the  fifth  cen- 
tury, partly  on  the  basis  of  the  spurious  correspondence,  mentioned  by  Eusebius 
(H.  E.  i.  13),  between  Christ  and  Abgarus  Uchorao  of  Edessa.  The  Abgarus  hke- 
nes3  is  said  to  have  come,  in  the  tenth  century,  into  the  church  of  St.  Sophia  at 
Constantinople,  thence  to  Rome,  where  it  is  stiU  shown  in  the  church  of  St.  Syl- 
vester.    But  Genoa  also  pretends  to  possess  the  original.    The  two  do  not  look 


570  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590, 

original  is  of  course  lost,  or  rather  never  existed,  and  is  sim- 
ply a  mythical  name  for  the  Byzantine  type  of  the  likeness  of 
Christ  which  appeared  after  the  fifth  century,  and  formed  the, 
basis  of  all  the  various  representations  of  Christ  until  Eaphael 
and  Michael  Angelo.  These  pictures  present  the  countenance 
of  the  Lord  in  the  bloom  of  youthful  vigor  and  beauty,  with  a 
free,  high  forehead,  clear,  beaming  eyes,  long,  straight  nose, 
hair  parted  in  the  middle,  and  a  somewhat  reddish  beard. 

(2)  The  EcoE  Homo  picture  of  the  suffering  Saviour  with 
the  crown  of  Jhojns.  ,Thi|^  is,  traced  back  by  tradition  to  St. 
Yeronica,  who  ac'compani'ed  the  Saviom*  on  the  way  to  Golgo- 
tha, and  gave  Him  her  veil  to  vdpe  the  sweat  from  His  face ; 
whereupon  the  Lord  miraculously  imprinted  on  the  cloth  the 
I  /  ^  image  of  His  thom-crowned  head-'V^ 

■  •  r  !v-* '  The  Abgarus  likeness  and  the  Yeronica  both  lay  claim  to  a 
,  miraculous  origin,  and  profess  to  be  eUove^  ax^LpoiroLijTaL,  pic- 
tures not  made  with  human  hands.  Besides  tliese,  however, 
tradition  tells  of  pictures  of  Christ  taken  in  a  natural  way  by 
Luke  and  by  Nicodemus.  The  Salvator  picture  in  the  Lateran 
chapel  Sancta  Sanctorum  in  Rome,  which  is  attributed  to 
Luke^  belongs  to  the  Edessene  or  Byzantine  type. 

"With  so  different  pretended  portraits  of  the  Lord  we  can- 

Z****^**' S         not  wonder  at  the  variations  of  the  pictures  of  Christ,  wliich 

the  Iconoclasts  used  as  an  argument  against  images.     Li  tmth, 

every  nation  formed  a  likeness  of  its  own,  according  to  its 

existing  ideals  of  art  and  virtue.  :•.  uf^  iiu  -^«<vfcA.«J<— ^ 

Great  influence  was  exerted  upon  the  representations  of 

Christ  by  the  apocryphal  descrij)tion  of  his  person  in  the  Latin 

iitm^-C'        epistle  of  Publius  Lentulus  (a  supposed  64end^'  Pilate)  to  the 

£  Ju-i  t/'        Roman  senate,  delineating  Christ  as  a  man  of  slender  form, 

much  alike,  and  are  of  course  only  copies.    ^.  Gliickselig  (Christus-Archaeologie, 

Prag,  1863)  lias  recently  made  an  attempt  to  restore  from  many  copies  an  Edessenum 

-      /  i*#<^      redivivum^  > U.  odws  K^  ;'*^/frj  k1  .'?>  riiai.i^i  Mm  -(ja^^^;  f^ ,  ^ '  ^ VftK^QNtf  ^ •  5f  • 

'   AtuAt^fct*^   *  Ti\\%  Veronica  likeness  is  said  to  have  come  to  Rome  about  a.  d.  VOO,  where 

l^y'^iUAJL.i^^ui   ^*  ^'^  preserved  among  the  rehcs  in  St.  Peter's,  but  is  shown  only  to  noble  person- 

^'^ft  .^^W^Z/  ages.     According  to  the  common  view,  advocated  especially  by  Mabillon  and  Pape- 

M^  oM^fQtnr^n  broch,  the  name  Yeronica  arose  from  the  simple  error  of  contracting  the  two  words 

^  fitffJL  JUvt^    *'^«  ^con  {uKU)i>),  the  tfue  image.    W.  Grimm  considers  the  whole  Veronica  story  a 

/&  '  Latin  version  of  the  Greek  Abgarus  legend.    /'-  u--". 


n 


K  "t^,r 


1 


fi^ 


\ 


<^£  .^w?..  A^^  '^"-^  "^ .^^^fiSXT' 

/^   0^^»>^^w  ,^r^^  .i-ee^M^  tS'Otf'^^  ^^«^^^  c^  /  ^  /^ 


/ 


<i*.-«^i 


/t'ty-t^ 


'  /^^Z.e^'tJ-eyi' 


^-d<^n^-^i 


9  ^  A  i       J 


Cf^ 


^.^E,-*-*-*^ 


,*^z>i:e-*>y  e^4i/y'A-^tP^£A.£^^^Ct/^^e^  a^-p^^e^i^  ^a^e^^^ys 


7  ^ 


fC^je^  A^^M^t^v^t^a^^'. 


't^^-7—r 


^^C^t. 


a^e^^^ 


tt^n^Ce^  Ji:,<U^  'i'^rf'tyt^   /^^fet^^^^i^t- 


/' 


672  THERD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

<* 

According  to  a  tradition  of  the  eiglitli  century  or  later,  tlie 
Evangelist  Luke  painted  not  only  Christ,  but  Mary  also,  and 
the  two  leading  apostles.  Still  later  legends  ascribe  to  him 
even  seven  Madonnas,  several  of  which,  it  is  pretended,  still 
exist ;  one,  for  example,  in  the  Boi'ghese  chapel  in  the  church 
of  Maria  Maggiore  at  Rome.  The  Madonnas  early  betray  the 
effort  to  represent  the  Yirgin  as  the  ideal  of  female  beauty, 
purity,  and  loveliness,  and  as  resembling  her  divine  Son.' 
Peter  is  usually  represented  with  a  round  head,  crisped  hair 
and  beard ;  Paul,  with  a  long  face,  bald  crown,  and  pointed 
beard ;  both,  frequently,  carrying  rolls  in  their  hands,  or  the 
first  tlie  cross  and  the  keys  (of  the  kingdom  of  heaven),  the 
second,  the  sword  (of  the  word  and  the  Spirit). 

Such  representations  of  Christ,  of  the  saints,  and  of  biblical 
events,  are  found  in  the  catacombs  and  other  places  of  burial, 
on  sarcophagi  and  tombstones,  in  private  houses,  on  cups  and 
seal  rings,  and  (in  spite  of  the  prohibition  of  the  council  of 
Elvira  in  305) "  on  the  walls  of  churches,  especially  behind  the 
altar. 

Manuscripts  of  the  Bible  also,  liturgical  books,  private 
houses,  and  even  the  vestments  of  officials  in  the  large  cities 
of  the  Byzantine  empire  were  ornamented  with  biblical  pic- 
tures. Bishop  Asterius  of  Amasea  in  Pontus,  in  the  second 
half  of  the  fourth  century,  protested  against  the  wearing  of 
these  "  God-pleasing  garments,"  *  and  advised  that  it  were 
better  with  the  proceeds  of  them  to  honor  the  living  images 
of  God,  and  support  the  poor ;  instead  of  wearing  the  palsied 
on  the  clothes,  to  visit  the  sick ;  and  instead  of  carrying  with 
one  the  image  of  the  sinful  woman  kneeling  and  embracing 
the  feet  of  Jesus,  rather  to  lament  one's  own  sins  with  tears 
of  contrition. 

The  custom  of  prostration^  before  the  picture,  in  token  of 

'  The  earliest  pictures  of  the  Madonna  with  the  child  are  found  in  the  Roman 
catacombs,  and  are  traced  in  part  by  the  Cavaliere  de  Rossi  (Imagini  Scelte,  1863) 
to  the  third  and  second  centuries. 

*  Cone.  Ehberin.  or  Illiberitin.  can.  36 :  "  Placuit  picturas  in  ecclesia  esse  non 
dcbere,  no  quod  cohtur  aut  adoratur,  in  parietibus  depingatur."  This  prohibition 
seems  to  have  been  confined,  however,  to  pictures  of  Christ  Himself;  else  we  must 
suppose  that  martyrs  and  saints  are  accounted  objects  of  cidtus  and  adoratio. 


§    111.      IMAGES    OF   MADONNA   AND    SAINTS.  573 

reverence  for  tlie  saint  represented  by  it,  first  appears  in  the 
Greek  cliurcli  in  the  sixth  century.  And  then,  that  the  unin- 
telligent people  should  in  many  cases  confound  the  image  "with 
the  object  represented,  attribute  to  the  outward,  material  thing 
a  magical  power  of  miracles,  and  connect  with  the  image  sun- 
dry superstitious  notions — must  be  expected.  Even  Augustine 
laments  that  among  the  rude  Christian  masses  there  are  many 
image-worshippers,'  but  counts  such  in  the  great  number  of 
those  nominal  Christians,  to  whom  the  essence  of  the  Gospel  is 
unknown. 

As  works  of  art,  these  primitive  Chi'istian  paintings  and 
sculptures  are,  in  general,  of  very  little  value;  of  much  less 
value  than  the  church  edifices.  They  are  rather  earnest  and 
elevated,  than  beautiful  and  harmonious.  Tor  they  proceeded 
originally  not  from  taste,  but  from  practical  want,  and,  at  least 
in  the  Greek  empire,  were  produced  chiefly  by  monks.  It 
perfectly  befitted  the  spirit  of  Christianity,  to  begin  with  ear- 
nestness and  sublimity,  rather  than,  as  heathenism,  with  sen- 
suous beauty.  Hence  also  its  repugnance  to  the  nude,  and  its 
modest  draping  of  voluptuous  forms;  only  hands,  feet,  and 
face  were  allowed  to  appear. 

The  Christian  taste,  it  is  well  known,  afterwards  changed, 
and,  on  the  principle  that  to  the  pure  all  things  are  pure,  it 
represented  even  Christ  on  the  cross,  and  the  holy  Child  at  His 
mother's  breast  or  in  His  mother's  arms,  without  covering. 

Furthermore,  in  the  time  of  Constantine  the  ancient  classi- 
cal painting  and  sculpture  had  grievously  degenerated ;  and 
even  in  their  best  days  they  reached  no  adequate  expression 
of  the  Christian  principle. 

In  this  view,  the  loss  of  so  many  of  those  old  works  of  art, 
which,  as  the  sheer  apparatus  of  idolatry,  were  unsj^aringly 
destroyed  by  the  iconoclastic  storms  of  the  succeeding  period, 
is  not  much  to  be  regretted.  It  was  in  the  later  middle  ages, 
when  church  architecture  had  already  reached  its  height,  that 
Christian  art  succeeded  in  unfolding  an  unprecedented  bloom 
of  painting  and  sculpture,  and  in  far  surpassing,  on  the  field 

'  De  moribus  ecclesiae  cath.  i.  To :  "  Xovi  multos  esse  picturarum  adulatores." 
The  Manichceans  charged  the  entire  catholic  church  with  image-worship. 


674  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

of  painting  at  least,  the  masterpieces  of  the  ancient  Greeks. 
Sculpture,  wliicli  can  present  man  only  in  his  finite  limitation, 
without  the  flush  of  life  or  the  beaming  eye,  like  a  shadowy 
form  from  the  realm  of  the  dead,  probably  attained  among  the 
ancient  Greeks  the  summit  of  perfection,  above  which  even 
Canova  and  Thorwaldsen  do  not  rise.  But  painting,  which 
can  represent  man  in  his  organic  connection  with  the  world 
about  him,  and,  to  a  certain  degree,  in  his  unlimited  depth  of 
soul  and  spirit,  as  expressed  in  the  countenance  and  the  eye, 
has  waited  for  the  influence  of  the  Christian  principle  to  fulfil 
its  perfect  mission,  and  in  the  Christs  of  Leonardo  da  Yinci, 
Fra  Beato  AngeHco,  Correggio,  and  Albrecht  Diirer,  and  the 
Madonnas  of  Kaphael,  has  fm-nished  the  noblest  works  which 
thus  far  adorn  the  history  of  the  art. 

§  112.     Consecrated  Gifts. 

It  remains  to  mention  in  this  connection  yet  another  form 
of  decoration  for  churches,  which  had  already  been  customary 
among  heathen  and  Jews:  consecrated  gifts.  Thus  the  tem- 
ple of  Delphi,  for  example,  had  become  exceedingly  rich 
through  such  presents  of  weapons,  silver  and  golden  vessels, 
statues,  &c.  In  almost  every  temple  of  Keptune  hung  votive 
tablets,  consecrated  to  the  god  in  thankfulness  for  deliverance 
from  shipwreck  by  him.'  A  similar  custom  seems  to  have 
existed  among  the  Jews ;  for  1  Sam.  xxi.  implies  that  David 
had  deposited  the  sword  of  the  Philistine  Goliath  in  the  sanc- 
tuary. In  the  court  of  the  priests  a  multitude  of  swords, 
lances,  costly  vessels,  and  other  valuable  things,  were  to  be 
seen. 

Constantine  embellished  the  altar  space  in  the  church  of 
Jerusalem  with  rich  gifts  of  gold,  silver,  and  precious  stones. 
Sozomen  tells  us  *  that  Cyril,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  in  a  time 
of  famine,  sold  the  treasures  and  sacred  gifts  of  the  church, 
and  that  afterwards  some  one  recognized  in  the  dress  of  an 
actress  the  vestment  he  once  presented  to  the  church. 

'  Comp.  Horace,  Ars  poet.  v.  20. 
«  H.  E.  iv.  25. 


§    113.      CHUECH   POETEY   AND   MUSIC.  575 

A  peculiar  variety  of  such  gifts,  namely,  memorials  of 
miraculous  cures,*  appeared  in  the  fifth  century ;  at  least  they 
are  first  mentioned  by  Theodoret,  who  said  of  them  in  his 
eighth  discourse  on  the  martyrs :  "  That  those  who  ask  with 
the  confidence  of  faith,  receive  what  they  ask,  is  plainly  proved 
by  their  sacred  gifts  in  testimony  of  their  healing.  Some  offer 
feet,  others  hands,  of  gold  or  silver,  and  these  gifts  show  their 
deliverance  from  those  evils,  as  tokens  of  which  they  have  been 
offered  by  the  restored."  With  the  worship  of  saints  this  cus- 
tom gained  strongly,  and  became  in  the  middle  age  quite  uni- 
versal. "Whoever  recovered  from  a  sickness,  considered  him- 
self bound  first  to  testify  by  a  gift  his  gratitude  to  the  saint 
whose  aid  he  had  invoked  in  his  distress.  Parents,  whose 
children  fortunately  survived  the  teething-fever,  offered  to  St. 
ApoUonia  (all  whose  teeth,  according  to  the  legend,  had  been 
broken  out  with  pincers  by  a  hangman's  servant)  gifts  of  jaw- 
bones in  wax.  In  like  manner  St.  Julian,  for  happily  accom- 
plished journeys,  and  St.  Hubert,  for  safe  return  from  the 
perils  of  the  chase,  were  very  richly  endowed ;  but  the  Yirgin 
Mary  more  than  all.  Almost  every  church  or  chapel  which 
has  a  miracle-working  image  of  the  mother  of  God,  possesses 
even  now  a  multitude  of  golden  and  silver  acknowledgments 
of  fortunate  returns  and  recoveries. 


§  113.     Church  Poetry  and  Music. 

J.  Rambach:  Anthologie  christl.  Gesange  aus  alien  Jahrh.  der  christl. 
Kirche.  Altona,  1817-'33.  H.  A.  Daniel:  Thesaurus  liymnologicus. 
Hal.  1841-56,  5  vols.  Edelestand  dtt  Meeil:  Poesies  populaires 
latines  anterieures  au  douzieme  siecle.  Paris,  1843.  0.  Foetlage: 
Gesange  der  christl.  Yorzeit.  Berlin,  1844.  G.  A.  Kokigsfeld  u. 
A.  W.  V.  Schlegel:  Altchristlicbe  Hymnen  u.  Gesange  lateinisch  u. 
deutsch.  Bonn,  1847.  Second  collection  by  Ko^^GSFELD,  Bonn,  1865. 
E.  E.  Koch  :  Geschichte  des  Kirchenlieds  n.  Kirchengesangs  der  christl., 
insbesondere  der  deutschen  evangel.  Kirche.  2d  ed.  Stuttgart,  1852 
f.  4  vols.  (i.  10-30).  F.  J.  Mone:  Latein.  Hymnen  des  Mittelalters 
(from  MSS.),  Freiburg,  1853-'55.  (Yol.  i,,  hymns  of  God  and  angels; 
ii.,  h.  of  Mary ;  iii.,  h.  of  saints.)    Basslee  :  Auswahl  aJt-christl.  Lieder 

I  *  'EKTWirc5/«aTa. 


576  THIED   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

vom  2-15ten  Jahrh.     Berlin,  1858.     E,  Oh.  TeejStch:   Sacred  Latin 

Poetry,  chiefly  lyrical,  selected  and  arranged  for  use ;  with  Notes  and 

Introduction  (1849),  2d  ed.  improved,  Lond.  and  Cambr.  1864.     The 

'^/^  ^  0  valuable  hymnological  works  of  Dr.  J.  M.  Neale  (of  Sackville  College, 

)  '  Oxford^ :    The  Ecclesiastical  Latin  Poetry  of  the  Middle  Ages  (in 

^      J^  Henry  T/iompsori's  History  of  Koman  Literature,  Lond.  and  Glasgow, 

'  '^'t^;  •    ^  1852,  p.  213   ff.) ;    Mediteval  Hymns  and  Sequences,   Lond.   1851 ; 

3  W^^-  '  ^^/  ^equentiai  ex  MissaUbus,  1852;  Hymns  of  the  Eastern  Church,  1862; 

/  V»*»diSr^^<^i (^.^v      several  articles  in  the  Ecclesiologist ;    and  a  Latin  dissertation,  De 

Sequentiis,  in  the  Essays  on  ZitiD'gioIogy,  etc.,  p.  359  sqq. ,' (Comp. 

also  J.  Ohakdlee:  The  Hymns  of  the  Primitive  Church,  now  first 

collected,  translated,  and  arranged,  Lond,  1837.) 

Poetiy,  and  its  twin  sister  music,  are  the  most  sublime  and 
spiritual  arts,  and  are  mucli  more  akin  to  the  genius  of  Cliris- 
tianitj,  and  minister  far  more  copiously  to  tlie  purposes  of  de- 
votion and  edification  than  architecture,  painting,  and  sculp- 
ture. Tliey  employ  word  and  tone,  and  can  speak  thereby 
more  directly  to  the  spirit  than  the  plastic  arts  by  stone  and 
color,  and  give  more  adequate  expression  to  the  whole  wealth 
of  the  world  of  thought  and  feeling.  In  the  Old  Testament, 
as  is  well  known,  they  were  essential  parts  of  divine  worship ; 
and  so  they  have  been  in  all  ages  and  almost  all  branches  of 
the  Christian  church. 

Of  the  various  species  of  religious  poetry,  the  hymn  is  the 
earliest  and  most  important.  It  has  a  rich  history,  in  which 
the  deepest  experiences  of  Christian  life  are  stored.  But  it 
attains  full  bloom  in  the  Evangelical  church  of  the  German 
and  English  tongue,  where  it,  like  the  Bible,  becomes  for  the 
first  time  truly  the  possession  of  the  people,  instead  of  being 
restricted  to  priest  or  choir. 

The  hymn,  in  the  narrower  sense,  belongs  to  lyrical  poetry, 
or  the  poetry  of  feeling,  in  distinction  from  the  epic  and  dramat- 
ic. It  differs  also  from  the  other  forms  of  the  lyric  (ode, 
elegy,  sonnet,  cantata,  &c.)  in  its  devotional  nature,  its  popu- 
lar form,  and  its  adaptation  to  singing.  The  hymn  is  a  popu- 
lar spiritual  song,  presenting  a  healthful  Christian  sentiment 
in  a  noble,  simple,  and  universally  intelligible  form,  and 
adapted  to  be  read  and  sung  with  edification  by  the  whole 
congregation  of  the  faithful.     It  must  therefore  contain  nothing 


;r^_  5/. //W^^^'^^^^^'*^' 


;^>i'>7/' 


/^^■^ 


^ 


§   113.      CHURCH    POETRY   AND   MUSIC.  577 

inconsistent  with  Scripture,  with  the  doctrines  of  the  church, 
with  general  Christian  experience,  or  with  the  spirit  of  devo- 
tion. Every  believing  Christian  can  join  in  the  Gloria  in 
Excelsis  or  the  Te  Deum.  The  classic  hymns,  which  are,  in- 
deed, comparatively  few,  stand  above  confessional  differences, 
and  resolve  the  discords  of  human  opinions  in  heavenly  har- 
mony. They  resemble  in  this  the  Psalms,  from  which  all 
branches  of  the  militant  church  draw  daily  nourishment  and 
comfort.  They  exhibit  the  bloom  of  tlie  Clii'istian  life  in  the 
Sabbath  di-ess  of  beauty  and  holy  raptm'e.  They  resound  in 
all  j^ious  hearts,  and  have,  like  the  daily  rising  sun  and  the 
yearly  returning  spring,  an  indestructible  freshness  and  power. 
In  truth,  their  benign  virtue  increases  with  increasing  age, 
like  that  of  healing  herbs,  which  is  the  richer  the  longer  they 
are  bruised.  They  are  true  benefactors  of  the  struggling 
church,  ministering  angels  sent  forth  to  minister  to  them  who 
shall  be  heirs  of  salvation.  ISText  to  the  Holy  Scripture,  a 
good  hymn-book  is  the  richest  fountain  of  edification. 

The  book  of  Psalms  is  the  oldest  Christian  hymn-book, 
inherited  by  the  church  from  the  ancient  covenant.  The 
appearance  of  the  Messiah  upon  earth  was  the  beginning  ol 
Christian  poetry,  and  was  greeted  by  the  immortal  songs  of 
Mary,  of  Elizabeth,  of  Simeon,  and  of  the  heavenly  host. 
Heligion  and  poetry  are  married,  therefore,  in  the  gospel.  In 
the  Epistles  traces  also  appear  of  primitive  Christian  songs,  in 
rhythmical  quotations  which  are  not  demonstrably  taken  from 
the  Old  Testament.'  We  know  from  the  letter  of  the  elder 
Pliny  to  Trajan,  that  the  Christians,  in  the  beginning  of  the 
second  century,  praised  Christ  as  their  God  in  songs ;  and 
from  a  later  source,  that  there  was  a  multitude  of  such  songs." 

'  E.  g.,  Eph.  V.  14,  where  either  the  Holy  Spirit  moving  in  the  apostolic  poesy, 
or  (as  I  venture  to  suggest)  the  previously  mentioned  Light  personified,  is  intro- 
duced (5ib  Kf-yn)  speaking  in  three  strophes : 

Kai  avicrra  e/c  twv  veKpuv  • 
Kal  iivLfpaiaei  aoi  6  Xpicros. 
Comp.  Rev.  iv.  8 ;  V?W!ii.^r6^  2  Tim.  ii.  11 ;  and  my  History  of  the  Apostolic 
Church,  §  141.  -     >  -  ^   -  .  ^.j 

=  Comp.  Euseb.  H.  E.  v.  28. 


VOL.  II.— 37 


578  THIKD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Notwithstanding  this,  we  have  no  complete  religions  song 
remaining  from  the  period  of  persecntion,  except  the  song  of 
Clement  of  Alexandria  to  the  divine  Logos — which,  however, 
cannot  be  called  a  hymn,  and  was  probably  never  intended  for 
pnblic  nse — the  Morning  Song '  and  the  Evening  Song  '^  in  the 
Apostolic  Constitutions,  especially  the  former,  the  so-called 
Gloria  in  Excelsis,  which,  as  an  expansion  of  the  doxology  of 
the  heavenly  hosts,  still  rings  in  all  parts  of  the  Christian 
world.  Next  in  order  comes  the  Te  Deum,  in  its  original 
Eastern  form,  or  the  Ka^^  eKdarrjv  rj/xepav,  which  is  older  than 
Ambrose.  The  Ter  Sanctus,  and  several  ancient  liturgical 
prayers,  also  may  be  regarded  as  poems.  For  the  hymn  is,  in 
fact,  nothing  else  than  a  prayer  in  the  festive  garb  of  poetical 
inspiration,  and  the  best  liturgical  prayers  are  poetical  crea- 
tions.    Measure  and  rhyme  are  by  no  means  essential. 

Upon  these  fruitful  biblical  and  primitive  Christian  models 
arose  the  hymnology  of  the  ancient  catholic  church,  which 
forms  the  first  stage  in  the  history  of  hymnology,  and  upon 
which  the  mediaeval,  and  then  the  evangelical  Protestant 
stage,  with  their  several  epochs,  follow 

§  114.     The  Poetry  of  the  Orintkbl  Church. 

Oomp,  the  third  volume  of  Daniel's  Thesaurus  hymnologicus  (the  Greek 
section  prepared  by  R.  Vormbaum)  ;  the  works  of  J.  M.  Neale,  quoted 
sub  §113;  an  article  on  OreeTc  Hymnology  in  the  Christian  Remem- 
Irancer,  for  April,  1859,  London ;  also  the  liturgical  works  quoted 
§98. 

We  should  expect  that  the  Gi'cek  church,  which  was  in 
advance  in  all  branches  of  Christian  doctrine  and  culture,  and 
received  from  ancient  Greece  so  rich  a  heritage  of  poetry, 
would  give  the  key  also  in  church  song.  This  is  true  to  a 
very  limited  extent.  The  Gloria  in  excelsis  and  the  Te  Deum 
are  unquestionably  the  most  valuable  jewels  of  sacred  poetry 
which  have  come  down  from  the  early  church,  and  they  are 

'  "T/iicos  e&j&ifJy,  beginning:  A(5|a  eV  vil'iVroir  ©ey,  in  Const.  Apost.  vii.  47  (al. 
48),  and  in  Daniel's  Thesaur.  hymnol.  iii.  p.  4. 

'  "Tfxvos  iairtptvSs,  wliich  begins;  *olJ5  lAaphv  aylas  5(5|Tjy,  see  Daniel,  Iii.  5. 


^*^><^  • 


/? 


W^T^y^.^*-^      -)         ^^ 


Oc(j!^ 


§    114.      THE   rOETET    OF   THE   OEIENTAL    CHUECH,  579 

both,  the  first  wholly,  the  second  in  part  of  Eastern  origin, 
and  going  back  perhaps  to  the  third  or  second  century.'  But, 
excepting  these  hymns  in  rhythmic  jDrose,  the  Greek  church 
of  the  first  six  centuries  produced  nothing  in  this  field  which 
has  had  permanent  value  or  general  use.^  It  long  adhered 
almost  exclusively  to  the  Psalms  of  David,  who,  as  Chrysostom 
says,  was  fii'st,  middle,  and  last  in  the  assemblies  of  the  Chris- 
tians, and  it  had,  in  opposition  to  heretical  predilections,  even 
a  decided  aversion  to  the  public  use  of  uninspired  songs.  Like 
the  Gnostics  before  them,  the  Arians  and  the  Apollinarians 
employed  religious  poetry  and  music  as  a  popular  means  of 
commending  and  j)i'op3,gating  their  errors,  and  thereby, 
although  the  abuse  never  forbids  the  right  use,  brought  dis- 
credit upon  these  arts.  Tlie  council  of  Laodicea,  about  a.  d. 
360,  prohibited  even  the  ecclesiastical  use  of  all  uninspired  or 
"  private  hymns," '  and  the  council  of  Chalcedoii,  in  451,  con- 
fii'med  this  decree. 

Yet  there  were  exceptions.     Chrysostom  thought  that  the  rU*^ f^^ 
perverting  influence  of  the  Arian  hymnology  in  Constantino-   ^^'*^^/fl^P^- 
pie  could  be  nfost  effectually  counteracted  by  the  positive  anti-  ^^^/cy-»t^aAt/ 
dote   of  solemn  ^  antiphonies   and   doxologies   in  processions.  <i^^^^v«yfcf 
Gi-egmy  N"azianzen  composed  orthodox  hymnsyOn  the  ancient  '^' 


±        JL  ""Civ  Wf  X 

the  use  of  the  churclLT  The  same^may  be  said  of  the  produ© 

'  That  the  so-called  Hymnus  angelicus,  based  on  Luke  ii.  14,  is  of  Greek  origin, 
and  was  used  as  a  morning  hymn,  is  abundantly  proven  by  Daniel,  Thesaurus 
hymnol.  tom.  ii.  p.  267  sqq.  It  is  found  in  slightly  varying  forms  in  the  Apostolic 
Constitutions,  1.  vii.  47  (al.  48),  in  the  famous  Alexandrian  Codex  of  the  Bible,  and 
other  places.  Of  the  so  called  Ambrosian  hymn  or  Te  Deum,  parts  at  least  are 
Greek,  comp.  Daniel,  1.  c.  p.  276  sqq. 

'■'  We  cannot  agree  with  the  anonymous  author  of  the  article  in  the  '•Christian 
Eemembrancer "  for  April,  1859,  p.  282,  who  places  Cosmas  of  Maiuma  as  high  as 
Adam  of  S.  Victor,  John  of  Damascus  as  high  as  Notker,  Andrew  of  Crete  as  high  as 
S.  Bernard,  and  thinks  Theophanes  and  Theodore  of  the  Studium  in  no  wise  inferior 
to  the  best  of  Sequence  writers  of  the  eleventh  and  twelfth  centui-ies. 

Can.  59  :  Oi  5e7  iSiojtikouj  ifioX/uour  Aeyecri&a;  eV  t^  iiiKKf\(xia.  By  this  must 
doubtless  be  understood  not  only  heretical,  but,  as  the  connection  shows,  all  extra- 
bibhcal  hymns  composed  by  men,  in  distinction  from  the  kmoviko.  fitfi\(a  t^s  Kaivrjs 


580 


THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


,\J 


^-'^' 


i 


ia?&^  of  Sophronius  of  Jerusalem,  who  glorified  the  high  festi- 
vals in  Anacreontic  stanzas ;  of  Sjnesiiis  of  Ptolemais  (about 
A.  D.  410),  who  composed  philosophi'cal  hymns ;  of  Nonnus  of 
Panopolis  in  Egypt,  who  wrote  a  paraphrase  of  the  Gospel  of 
John  in  hexameters;  of  Eudoxia,  the  wife  of  the  emperor 
Theodosius  II. ;  and  of  Paul  Silentiarius,  a  statesman  under 
Justinian  I.,  from  whom  we  have  several  epigrams  and  an 
interesting  poetical  description  of  the  church  of  St.  Sophia, 
written  for  its  consecration.  Anatolius,  bishop  of  Constanti- 
nople (f458),  is  properly  the  only  poet  of  this  period  who 
realized  to  any  extent  the  idea  of  the  church  hymn,  and  whose 
songs  were  adapted  to  popular  use.^ 

7  The  Syrian  church  was  the  first  of  all  the  Oriental  churches 
to  produce  and  admit  into  public  worship  a  popular  orthodox 
poetry,  in  oj)position  to  the  heretical  poetry  of  the  Gnostic 
Bardesanes  (about  a.  d.  170)  and  his  son  Harmonius.  Ephkatvi 
Sykus  (f  378Wed  the  way  with  a  large  number  of  successful 
hynms  ija'-tlie  Syrian  language,  and  found  in  Isaac,  presbyter 
of^-Amioch,  in  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century,  and  especially 
in  Jacob,  bishop  of  Sarug  in  Mesopotamia  (f  521),  worthy  suc- 
.cessors.*  ,7 
^dM^     After  the  fiYth  century  the  Greek  chm-ch  lost  its  prejudices 


M- 


^r 


against  poetry,  and  produced  a  great  but  slightly  known  abun- 
dance of  sacred  songs  for  public  worship. 

In  the  liisto^'y  of  the  Greek  church  poetry,  as  well  as  the 
Latin,  we  may,  distinguish  three  epochs :  (1)  that  of  formation, 
while  it  was  slowly  throwing  ofl*  classical  metres,  and  inventing 
its  peculiar  style,  down  to  about  650 ;  (2)  that  of  perfection, 
-  J  down  to  820 ;  (3)  that  of  decline  and  decay,  to  1400  or  to 
the  fall   of  Constantinople.      The  first  period,   beautiful   as 


^  Xeale,  in  his  Hymns  of  the  Eastern  Church,  p.  3  sqq.,  gives  several  of  them  iu 
free  metrical  reproduction.     See  below. 

^  On  the  Syrian  hymnology  there  are  several  special  treatises,  by  Augusti  :  De 
hymuis  Syrorum  sacris,  1814;  Hahn:  Bardesanes  Gnosticus,  Syrorum  primus 
hymnologus,  1819;  Zingerle:  Die  hcil.  Muse  der  Syrer,  1833  (with  German  trans- 
lations from  Ephraun).  Comp.  also  Jos.  Sim.  Assemani  :  Bibl.  orient,  i.  80  sqq.  (with 
Latin  versions),  and  Daniel's  Thcs.  hymnol.  torn.  iii.  1855,  pp.  139-268.  The 
Syrian  hymns  for  Daniel's  Thesaurus  were  prepared  by  L.  Splieth,  who  gives  them 
with  the  German  version  of  Zingerle.  An  English  version  by  H.  Bukgess  :  Select 
metrical  Hymns  and  Homilies  of  Ephroera  S.,  Lond.  1853,  2  vols. 


f.5JS     {,  '■*<'4/ 

r 


'"        a:^:^-*^  ^  ^..^:2t^  ,^^^^r^^  a<4^Z>^t..^>^ 

^.»^C^^^OC,    .^C^^C^^'^>^     ^^Ar^yy^, 

e:^- ^/d^  ^^^^^  ^^-^  ^  ^^• 

g^  e/eA...^^C.^  ..^yd^  a/^'..^^ 


i^: 


S^O. 


\rCc^^i^  Wyi^^'X^'Cf  ^^-i,^-<,t/-  ^yio-     'rC-y-i.*^^^-^^ 
^/Lc-«/t    &^~^Ct'tyf />v.^-i<^  aiA,*^ ^d-t^  . 


ik   I    A.-    %     ^fe.,^*.'! 


;^.^^  ^  ^^^^ J^^^t^^ /^-u^^ 


^^z/^Ziu^  c.,..^/^;^  ^^^  ^ 


/$ir></^  af/&^3t^^  '^^la^  ^  ^-^-^-^^e-i^^ , 


A,^     v^ 


^a.^tl^^^^U*.^'^^^  ; 


77 


^ 


§   114r.      THE   POETKT   OF   THE   ORIENTAL    CHITECH.  5S1 

are  some  of  the  odes  of  Gregory  of  Nazianzen  and  Sophronms 
of  Jerusalem,  has  impressed  scarcely  any  traces  on  the  Greek 
office  books.  The  flourishing  period  of  Greek  poetry  coin- 
cides with  the  period  of  the  image  controversies,  and  the  most 
eminent  poets  were  at  the  same  time  advocates  of  images ; 
pre-eminent  among  them  being  John  of  Damascus,  who  has 
the  double  honor  of  being  the  gi-eatest  theologian  and  the 
greatest  poet  of  the  Greek  church. 

The  flower  of  Greek  poetry  belongs,  therefore,  in  a  later 
division  of  our  history.  Yet,  since  we  find  at  least  the  rise  of 
it  in  the  fifth  century,  we  shall  give  here  a  brief  description 
of  its  peculiar  character. 

The  earliest  poets  of  the  Greek  church,  especially  Gregory 
Nazianzen,  in  the  fourth,  and  Sophronius  of  Jerusalem  in  the 
seventh  century,  employed  the  classical  metres,  which  are 
entirely  unsuitable  to  Christian  ideas  and  church  song,  and 
therefore  gradually  fell  out  of  use.^  Rhyme  found  no  entrance 
into  the  Greek  chm"ch.  In  its  stead  the  metrical  or  harmonic 
prose  was  adopted  from  the  Hebrew  poetry  and  the  earliest 
Christian  hymns  of  Mary,  Zacharias,  Simeon,  and  the  angelic 
host.  Anatolius  of  Constantinople  (t4:o8)  was  the  first  to 
renounce  the  tyi'anny  of  the  classic  metre  and  strike  out  a  new 
path.  The  essential  points  in  the  peculiar  system  of  the  Greek 
versification  are  the  following :  ^ 

The  first  stanza,  which  forms  the  model  of  the  succeeding 
ones,  is  called  in  technical  language  Hirmos^  because  it  draws 
the  others  after  it.  The  succeeding  stanzas  are  called  Tropa- 
ria  (stanzas),  and  are  divided,  for  chanting,  by  commas,  with- 
out regard  to  the  sense.  A  number  of  troparia,  from  three  to 
twenty  or  more,  forms  an  Ode,  and  this  corresponds  to  the 
Latin  Sequence,  which  was  introduced  about  the  same  time  by 
the  monk  ISTotker  in  St.  Gall.     Each  ode  is  founded  on  a 


^  See  some  odes  of  Gregory,  Euthymius  and  Sophronius  in  Daniel's  Thes.  torn. 
iii.  p.  5  sqq.  He  gives  also  the  hymn  of  Clement  of  Alex.  ({/Vvos  toG  croT^pos 
KpKTTou),  the  vixvos  kaibivos  and  r^vos  kainpivos,  of  the  third  century. 

*  See  the  details  in  Neale's  works,  whom  we  mainly  follow  as  regards  the  East- 
em  hymnology,  and  in  the  article  above  alluded  to  in  the  "Christian  Remem- 
brancer "  (probably  also  by  Neale). 


582  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

hirmos  and  ends  with  a  troparion  in  praise  of  the  Holy  Virgin.' 
The  odes  are  commonly  arranged  (probably  after  the  example 
of  such  Psalms  as  the  25th,  112th,  and  119th)  in  acrostic, 
sometimes  in  alphabetic,  order,  Nine  odes  form  a  Canon.^ 
The  older  odes  on  the  great  events  of  the  incarnation,  the 
resurrection,  and  the  ascension,  are  sometimes  sublime;  but 
the  later  long  canons,  in  glorification  of  unknown  martyrs  are 
extremely  prosaic  and  tedious  and  full  of  elements  foreign  to 
the  gospel.  Even  the  best  hymnological  productions  of  the 
East  lack  the  healthful  simplicity,  naturalness,  fervor,  and 
depth  of  the  Latin  and  of  the  Evangelical  Protestant  hymn. 

The  principal  church  poets  of  the  East  are  Anatolius 
(t  458),  Andrew  of  Crete  (660-Y32),  Germanus  I.  (634-T34), 
John  of  Damascus  (f  about  780),  Cosmas  of  Jerusalem,  called 
the  Melodist  (Y80),  Theophanes  (759-81^),  Theodore  of  the 
Studium  (826),  Methodius  I.  (846),  Joseph  of  the  Studium 
(830),  Metrophanes  of  Smyrna  (f  900),  Leo  VL  (886-917), 
and  EuTHYMius  (f  920). 

The  Greek  church  poetry  is  contained  in  the  liturgical 
books,  especially  in  the  twelve  volumes  of  the  Mensea,  which 
correspond  to  the  Latin  Breviary,  and  consist,  for  the  most 
part,  of  poetic  or  half-poetic  odes  in  rhythmic  prose.^     These 

^  Hence  this  last  troparion  is  called  Thcotohion.,  Irom  ^sot6kos,  the  constant 
predicate  of  the  Virgin  Mary.     The  Stauro-theotokion  celebrates  Mary  at  the  cross. 

^  Kaviiv.  Neale  says  (Hymns  of  the  East.  Ch.  Introd.  p.  xxix.):  "A  canon 
consists  of  Nine  Odes — each  Ode  containing  any  number  of  troparia  from  three  to 
beyond  twenty.  The  reason  for  the  number  nine  is  this  :  that  there  are  nine  Scrip- 
tural canticles  employed  at  Lauds  (ejj  rlv  "Op^pov),  on  the  model  of  which  those  in 
every  Canon  are  formed.  The  first :  that  of  Moses  after  the  passage  of  the  Eed  Sea 
— the  second,  that  of  Moses  in  Deuteronomy  (ch.  xxxiii.) — the  third,  that  of  Han- 
nah— the  fourth,  that  of  Habakkuk — the  fifth,  that  of  Isaiah  (ch.  xxvi.  9-20) — the 
sixth,  that  of  Jonah — the  seventh,  that  of  the  Three  Children  (verses  3-34,  our 
"Song"  in  the  Bible  Version) — the  eighth,  Benedicitc — the  mu.t\\,  Magnificat  and 
Benedictus.'''' 

^  Neale,  1.  c.  p.  xxxviii.,  says  of  the  Oriental  Breviary :  "  This  is  the  staple  of 
those  three  thousand  pages — under  whatever  name  the  stanzas  may  be  presented — 
forming  Canons  and  Odes ;  as  Troparia,  Idiomela,  Stichera,  Stichoi,  Coutakia, 
Catliismata,  Theotokia,  Triodia,  Stauro-tlieotokia,  Catavasiai — or  whatever  else. 
Nine-tenths  of  the  Eastern  Service-book  is  poeti-y."  Besides  these  we  find  poetical 
pieces  also  in  the  other  liturgical  books :  the  Paracletice  or  the  Great  Octoechus,  in 
eight  parts  (for  eight  weeks  and  Sundays),  the  small  Octoechus,  the  Triodion  (for 


§   114.      THE   POETRY   OF   THE   ORIENTAL   CHURCH.  583 

treasures,  on  which  nine  centuries  have  Avronght,  have  hither- 
to been  almost  exclusively  confined  to  the  Oriental  church, 
and  in  fact  yield  hut  few  grains  of  gold  for  general  use.  Neale 
has  latterly  made  a  haj^py  effort  to  reproduce  and  make  acces- 
sible in  modern  English  metres,  with  very  considerable  abridg- 
ments, the  most  valuable  hymns  of  the  Greek  church.' 

We  give  a  few  specimens  of  Neale's  translations  of  hymns 
of  St.  Auatolius,  patriarch  of  Constantino]3le,  who  attended 
the  council  of  Chalcedon  (451).  The  first  is  a  Christmas  hymn, 
commencing  in  Greek : 

Me<ya  koL  irapdho^ov  ^avfia, 

"A  great  and  mighty  wonder, 
The  festal  makes  secure : 
The  Yirgin  bears  the  Infant 

With  Virgin-honor  pure. 
« 

The  Word  is  made  incarnate, 

And  yet  remains  on  high : 
And  cherubim  sing  anthems 

To  shepherds  from  the  sky. 

And  we  with  them  triumphant 

Repeat  the  hymn  agam : 
'  To  God  on  high  be  glory, 

And  peace  on  earth  to  men ! ' 

While  thus  they  sing  your  Monarch, 

Those  bright  angelic  bands, 
Rejoice,  ye  vales  and  mountains ! 

Ye  oceans,  clap  your  hands ! 

the  Tient  season),  and  the  Pentecostarion  (for  the  Easter  season),  Neale  (p.  xli.) 
reckons  that  all  these  volmnes  together  would  form  at  least  5,000  closely-printed, 
double  column  quarto  pages,  of  which  4,000  pages  would  be  poetry.  He  adds  an 
expression  of  surprise  at  the  "  marvellous  ignorance  in  which  Enghsh  ecclesiastical 
scholars  are  content  to  remain  of  this  huge  treasure  of  divinity — the  gradual  com- 
pletion of  nine  centuries  at  least."  Respecting  the  value  of  these  poetical  and 
theological  treasures,  however,  few  will  agree  with  this  learned  and  enthusiastic 
Anglican  venerator  of  the  Oriental  church. 

'  Neale,  in  his  preface,  says  of  his  translations :  "  These  are  literally,  I  beUeve, 
the  only  EngUsh  versions  of  any  part  of  the  treasures  of  Oriental  Hymnology. 
There  is  scarcely  a  first  or  second-rate  hymn  of  the  Roman  Breviary  which  has  not 
been  translated:  of  many  we  have  six  or  eight  versions.  The  eighteen  quarto 
volvunes  of  Greek  church-poetry  can  only  at  present  be  known  to  the  English  reader 
by  my  Uttle  book." 


584:  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Since  all  He  comes  to  ransom, 

By  aU  be  He  adored, 
The  Infant  bom  in  Bethlehem, 

The  Saviour  and  the  Lord  ! 

Now  idol  forms  shall  perish, 

All  error  shall  decay. 
And  Christ  shall  wield  His  sceptre, 

Our  LoKD  and  God  for  aye." 

Another  specimen  of  a  Christmas  hymn  by  the  same,  com- 
mencing iv  BTjSXeefi : ' 

"  In  Bethlehem  is  He  born  ! 
Maker  of  all  things,  everlasting  God  ! 

He  opens  Eden's  gate. 
Monarch  of  ages !    Thence  the  fiery  sword 

Gives  glorious  passage ;  thence. 
The  severing  mid-wall  overthrown,  the  powers 

Of  earth  and  Heaven  are  one ; 
Angels  and  men  renew  their  ancient  league, 

The  pure  rejoin  the  pure, 
In  happy  union  !    Now  the  Virgin-womb 

Like  some  cherubic  throne 
Containeth  Him,  the  Uncontainable : 

Bears  Him,  whom  while  they  bear 
The  seraphs  tremble !  bears  Him,  as  He  comes 

To  shower  upon  the  world 
The  fulness  of  His  everlasting  love ! " 

One  more  on  Christ  calming  the  storm,  tp<^epa'i  TpcKVfXM^, 
as  reproduced  by  ISTeale : 

"  Fierce  was  the  wild  billow     , 

Dark  was  the  night ; 
Oars  labor'd  heavily ; 

Foam  glimmer' d  white ; 
Mariners  trembled ; 

Peril  was  nigh ; 
Then  said  the  God  of  God 

— '  Peace !    It  is  I.' 

Ridge  of  the  moimtain-wave, 
Lower  thy  crest ! 

^  From  the  "  Christian  Remembrancer,"  1.  c.  p.  302.     Comp.  Neale,  Hymns  of 
the  Eastern  Church,  p.  13. 


115.      THE   LATIN   HYMN.  685 

Wail  of  EuroclydoD, 

Be  thou  at  rest ! 
Peril  can  none  be — 

Sorrow  must  fly — 
Where  saith  the  Light  of  Light, 

—'Peace!    It  is  L' 

Jesu,  Deliverer! 

Come  Thou  to  me : 
Soothe  Thou  my  voyaging 

Over  life's  sea ! 
Thou,  when  the  storm  of  death 

Roars,  sweeping  by, 
Whisper,  0  Truth  of  Truth  ! 

—'Peace!    It  is  L'" 


§  115.     The  Latin  Hymn. 

More  important  than  tlie  Greek  liymnology  is  tlie  Latin 
from  the  fourth  to  the  sixteenth  century.  Smaller  in  compass, 
it  surpasses  it  in  artless  simplicity  and  truth,  and  in  richness, 
vigor,  and  fulness  of  thought,  and  is  much  more  atin  to  the 
Protestant  spirit.  With  objective  churchly  character  it  com- 
bines deeper  feeling  and  more  subjective  appropriation  and 
experience  of  salvation,  and  hence  more  wannth  and  fervor 
than  the  Greek.  It  forms  in  these  respects  the  transition  to 
the  Evangelical  hymn,  which  gives  the  most  beautiful  and 
profound  expression  to  the  personal  enjoyment  of  the  Saviour 
and  his  redeeming  grace.  The  best  Latin  hymns  have  come 
through  the  Roman  Breviary  into  general  use,  and  through 
translations  and  reproductions  have  become  naturalized  in 
Protestant  churches.  They  treat  for  the  most  part  of  the  great 
facts  of  salvation  and  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  Christianity. 
But  many  of  them  are  devoted  to  the  praises  of  Mary  and  the 
martyrs,  and  vitiated  with  superstitions. 

In  the  Latin  church,  as  in  the  Greek,  heretics  gave  a  whole- 
some impulse  to  poetical  activity.  The  two  patriarchs  of  Latin 
church  poetry,  Hilary  and  Ambrose,  were  the  champions  of 
orthodoxy  against  Arianism  in  the  West. 

The  genius  of  Christianity  exerted  an  influence,  partly 
liberating,  partly  transforming,  upon  the  Latin  language  and 


586  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

versification.  Poetry  in  its  j^outliful  vigor  is  like  an  impetuous 
mountain  torrent,  whicli  knows  no  bounds  and  breaks  through 
all  obstacles ;  but  in  its  riper  form  it  restrains  itself  and  be- 
comes truly  free  in  self-limitation ;  it  assumes  a  symmetrical, 
well-regulated  motion  and  combines  it  with  periodical  rest. 
This  is  rhythm,  which  came  to  its  perfection  in  the  poetry  of 
Greece  and  Rome.  But  the  laws  of  metre  were  an  undue 
restraint  to  the  new  Christian  spirit  which  required  a  new 
form.  The  Latin  poetry  of  the  church  has  a  language  of  its 
own,  a  grammar  of  its  own,  a  prosody  of  its  own,  and  a  beauty 
of  its  own,  and  in  freshness,  vigor,  and  melody  even  surpasses 
the  Latin  poetry  of  the  classics.  It  had  to  cast  away  all  the 
helps  of  the  mythological  fables,  but  drew  a  purer  and  richer 
inspiration  from  the  sacred  history  and  poetry  of  the  Bible, 
and  the  heroic  age  of  Christianity.  But  it  had  first  to  pass 
through  a  state  of  barbarism  like  the  Romanic  languages  of 
the  South  of  Europe  in  their  transition  from  the  old  Latin. 
"We  observe  the  Latin  language  under  the  influence  of  the 
youthful  and  hopeful  religion  of  Christ,  as  at  the  breath  of  a 
second  spring,  putting  forth  fresh  blossoms  and  flowers  and 
clothing  itself  with  a  new  garment  of  beauty,  old  words 
assuming  new  and  deeper  meanings,  obsolete  words  reviving, 
new  words  forming.  In  all  this  there  is  much  to  ofi"end  a 
fastidious  classical  taste,  yet  the  losses  are  richly  compensated 
by  the  gains.  Christianity  at  its  triumph  in  the  Roman  em- 
pire found  the  classical  Latin  rapidly  approaching  its  decay  and 
dissolution  ;  in  the  course  of  time  it  brought  out  of  its  ashes  a 
new  creation.  ' 

The  classical  system  of  prosody  was  gradually  loosened, 
and  accent  substituted  for  quantity.  Rhyme,  unknown  to  the 
ancients  as  a  system  or  rule,  was  introduced  in  the  middle  or 
at  the  end  of  the  verse,  giving  the  song  a  lyrical  character, 
and  thus  a  closer  affinity  with  music.  For  the  hymns  were  to 
be  sung  in  the  churches.  This  accented  and  rhymed  poetry 
was  at  first,  indeed,  very  imperfect,  yet  much  better  adapted 
to  the  freedom,  depth,  and  warmth  of  the  Christian  spirit,  than 
the  stereotyped,  stiff,  and  cold  measure  of  the  heathen  classics.'  '^ 
'  Archbishop  Trench  (Sacred  Latin  Poetry,  2d  ed.  Introd.  p.  9) :  "A  struggle 


I 


§   115.      THE   LATIN   HTMlSr.  587 

Quantity  is  a  more  or  less  arbitrary  and  artificial  device; 
accent,  or  the  empliasizing  of  one  syllable  in  a  polysyllabic 
word,  is  natural  and  popular,  and  commends  itself  to  the  ear. 
Ambrose  and  his  followers,  with  happy  instinct,  chose  for  their 
hymns  the  Iambic  dimeter,  which  is  the  least  metrical  and  the 
most  rliythmical  of  all  the  ancient  metres.  The  tendency  to 
euphonious  rhyme  went  hand  in  hand  with  the  accented 
rhythm,  and  this  tendency  appears  occasionally  in  its  crude 
beginnings  in  Hilary  and  Ambrose,  but  more  fully  in  Dama- 
sus,  the  proper  father  of  this  improvement. 

Rhyme  is  not  the  invention  of  either  a  barbaric  or  an  over- 
civilized  age,  but  appears  more  or  less  in  almost  all  nations, 
languages,  and  grades  of  culture.  Like  rhythm  it  springs 
from  the  natural  esthetic  sense  of  proportion,  euphony,  limita-  ^ 
tion,  and  periodic  return.'  It  is  found  here  and  there,  even  in 
the  oldest  popular  poetry  of  republican  Rome,  that  of  Ennius, 
for  example."  It  occurs  not  rarely  in  the  prose  even  of  Cicero, 
and  especially  of  St.  Augustine,  who  delights  in  ingenious 
alliterations  and  verbal  antitheses,  X^kajpatet  and  latet^  sj)es  and 

commenced  from  the  first  between  the  form  and  the  spirit,  between  the  old  heathen 
form  and  the  new  Christian  spirit — the  latter  seeking  to  release  itself  from  the 
shackles  and  restraints  which  the  former  imposed  upon  it ;  and  which  were  to  it, 
not  a  help  and  a  support,  as  the  form  should  be,  but  a  hindrance  and  a  weakness — 
not  liberty,  but  now  rather  a  most  galMng  bondage.  The  new  wine  went  on  fer- 
menting in  the  old  bottles,  till  it  burst  them  asunder,  though  not  itself  to  be  spilt 
and  lost  in  the  process,  but  to  be  gathered  into  nobler  chaUces,  vessels  more  fitted 
to  contain  it — new,  even  as  that  which  was  poured  into  them  was  new."  This  pro- 
cess of  hberation  Trench  illustrates  in  Prudentius,  who  stUl  adheres  in  general  to 
the  laws  of  prosody,  but  indulges  the  largest  hcense. 

*  Comp.  the  excellent  remarks  of  Trench,  1.  c.  p.  26  sqq.,  on  the  import  of 
rhyme.  Milton,  as  is  well  known,  blinded  by  his  predilection  for  the  ancient  clas- 
sics, calls  rhyme  (in  the  preface  to  "  Paradise  Lost ")  "  the  invention  of  a  barbarous 
age,  to  set  off  wretched  matter  and  lame  metre ;  a  thing  of  itself  to  all  judicious 
ears  trivial  and  of  no  true  musical  delight."  Trench  answers  this  biassed. judgment 
by  pointing  to  Milton's  own  rhymed  odes  and  sonnets,  "  the  noblest  Ipics  which 
EngUsh  Uterature  possesses." 

*  "It  is  a  curious  thing,"  says  J.  M.  Xeale  (The  Eccles.  Lat.  Poetry  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  p.  214),  "that,  in  rejecting  the  foreign  laws  in  which  Latin  had  so 
long  gloried,  the  Christian  poets  were  in  fact  merely  reviving,  in  an  inspired  form, 
the  early  melodies  of  repubUcan  Rome ; — the  rhythmical  ballads  which  were  the 
delight  of  the  men  that  warred  with  the  Samnites,  and  the  Volscians,  and  Hanni- 
bal." 


688  THIED  PEEIOD,    A.D.    311-590. 

res^  fides  and  mdes^  hene  and  plene,  oritur  and  moritur. 
Damasus  of  Rome  introduced  it  into  sacred  poetry.'  But  it 
was  in  tlie  sacred  Latin  poetry  of  the  middle  age  that  rhyme 
first  assumed  a  regular  form,  and  in  Adam  of  St.  Victor,  Hil- 
debert,  St.  Bernard,  Bernard  of  Clugny,  Thomas  Aquinas,  Bona- 
Ventura,  Thomas  a  Celano,  and  Jacobus  de  Benedictis  (author 
of  the  Stdbat  mater)^  it  reached  its  perfection  in  the  twelfth 
and  thirteenth  centuries ;  above  all,  in  that  incomparable  giant 
hymn  on  the  judgment,  the  tremendous  power  of  which  resides, 
first  indeed  in  its  earnest  matter,  but  next  in  its  inimitable 
mastery  of  the  musical  treatment  of  vowels.  I  mean,  of 
course,  the  Dies  irce  of  the  Franciscan  monk  Thomas  a  Celano 
(about  1250),  which  excites  new  wonder  on  every  reading,  and 
to  which  no  translation  in  any  modern  language  can  do  full 
justice.  In  Adam  of  St.  Victor,  too,  of  the  twelfth  century, 
occur  unsurpassable  rhymes ;  e.  g.,  the  picture  of  the  Evange- 
list John  (in  the  poem:  De  8.  Joanne  evangelista),  which 
Olshausen  has  chosen  for  the  motto  of  his  commentary  on  the 
fourth  Gospel,  and  which  Trench  declares  the  most  beautiful 
stanza  in  the  Latin  church  poetry : 

"Volat  avis  sine  meta 
Quo  nee  vates  nee  propheta 

Evolavit  altius : 
Tarn  implenda,''  quam  impleta,? 
Nunquam  vidit  tot  seereta 
Purus  homo  purius."     ^  ' 

The  metre  of  the  Latin  hymns  is  various,  and  often  hard 
to  be  defined.  Gavanti.^  supposes  six  principal  kinds  of 
verse : 

1.  lambici  dimetri  (as :  "  Yexilla  regis  prodeunt "). 

2.  lambici  trimetri  (ternarii  vel  senarii,  as :  "  Antra  deserti 
teneris  sub  annis  "). 

*  In  his  Hymnus  de  S.  Agatha,  see  Daniel,  Thes.  hymnol.  torn.  i.  p.  9,  and  Fort- 
lage,  Gesiinge  christl.  Vorzeit,  p.  865. 
The  Apocalypse. 
The  Gospel  liistory, 
f  Thesaur.  rit.  sacr.,  cited  in  the  above-named  hymnological  work  of  Konigsfeld 
and  A.  W.  Schlegcl,  p.  xxi.,  first  collection. 


S'  n 


A 


S 


#  ^ 


^l.4U.^K^:,  /Uf^^      ^    <^^>^-iSi«.^i^  ^*''*26!^^  ^^'^^^-^^^"^^  ^  ^^^'^^ 


ri«  I'l  ^r<> . 


^Vl^J 


.^kwro^  ^^a:  ^i^^  ^./ii^fl.^  MnML-Ui^  cw^^  1^ 


§  116.   THE  LATD^  POETS  AND  HYMNS.         589 

3.  Trochaici    dimetri   ("Pange,   lingua,   gloriosi    corporis 
mjsterium,"  a  encliaristic  hymn  of  Thomas  Aquinas). 

4.  Sappliici,  cum  Adonico  in  fine  (as:  "TJt  queant  laxis 
resonare  fibris  "). 

5.  Trochaici  (as :  "  Ave  maris  stella  "). 

6.  Asclepiadici,  cum  Glyconico  in  fine  (as :  "  Sacris  solem- 
niis  juucta  sint  gaudia  "). 

In  the  period  before  us  the  Iambic  dimeter  prevails ;  in 
Hilary  and  Ambrose  without  exception. 


§  116.     The  Latin  Poets  and  Hymns. 

The  poets  of  this  period,  Prudentius  excepted,  are  all 
clergymen,  and  the  best  are  eminent  theologians  whose  lives 
and  labors  have  their  more  appropriate  place  in  other  parts  of 
this  work. 

HiLAiiT,  bishop  of  Poitiers  (hence  Pictaviensis,  f  36S),  the 
Athanasius  of  the  "West  in  the  Arian  controversies,  is,  accord- 
ing to  the  testimony  of  Jerome,^  the  first  hymn  writer  of  the 
Latin  church.  During  his  exile  in  Phrygia  and  in  Constanti- 
nople, he  became  acquainted  with  the  Arian  hymns  and  was 
incited  by  them  to  compose,  after  his  return,  orthodox  hymns 
for  the  use  of  the  "Western  chm'ch.  He  thus  laid  the  founda- 
tion of  Latin  hymnology.  He  composed  the  beautiful  morn- 
ing hymn :  "  Lucis  largitor  splendide ; "  the  Pentecostal 
hymn  :  "  Beata  nobis  gaudia ; "  and,  perhaps,  the  Latin  repro- 
duction of  the  famous  Gloria  in  excels-is.  The  authorship  of 
many  of  the  hymns  ascribed  to  him  is  doubtful,  especially 
those  in  which  the  regular  rhyme  already  appears,  as  in  the 
Epiphany  hymn : 

"Jesus  refulsit  omnium 
Pius  redemptor  gentium." 

We  give  as  a  specimen  a  part  of  the  first  tkree  stanzas  of  his 

'  Catal.  vir.  illustr.  c.  100.  Comp.  also  Isidore  of  Seville,  De  oflSc.  eccles.  1.  i., 
and  OTerthiir,  in  the  preface  to  his  edition  of  the  works  of  Hilary. 


590 


THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


morning  hymn,  which  has  been  often  translated  into  German 
and  English :  * 


"  Lucis  largitor  splendide, 
Cuius  sereno  lumine 
Post  lapsa  noctis  tempora 
Dies  refusus  panditur : 

^KTu  verus  mundi  Lucifer, 
Non  is,  qui  parvi-  sideris, 
Venturte  lucis  nuntius 
Augusto  fulget  lumine : 

. "  Sed  toto  sole  clarior, 
Lux  ipse  totus  et  dies, 
titerna  nostri  pectoris 
Uluminaus  pnecordia." 


"  0  glorious  Father  of  the  light, 
From  whose  effulgence,  calm  and  bright, 
Soon  as  the  hours  of  night  are  fled, 
The  briUiance  of  the  dawn  is  shed : 

/^Thou  art  the  dark  world's  truer  ray: 
No  radiance  of  that  lesser  day. 
That  heralds,  in  the  morn  begun, 
The  advent  of  our  darker  sun : 

,-"  But,  brighter  than  its  noontide  gleam, 
Thyself  full  dayhght's  fullest  beam. 
The  inmost  mansions  of  our  breast 
Thou  by  Thy  grace  illuminest." 


Ambrose,  the  illustrious  bishop  of  Milan,  though  somewhat 
younger  (f  397),  is  still  considered,  on  account  of  the  number 
and  value  of  his  hymns,  the  proper  father  of  Latin  church 
song,  and  became  the  model  for  all  successors.  Such  was  his 
fame  as  a  hymnographer  that  the  words  Amhrosianus  and 
Jiymnus  were  at  one  time  nearly  synonymous.  His  genuine 
hymns  are  distinguished  for  strong  faith,  elevated  but  rude 
simplicity,  noble  dignity,  deep  unction,  and  a  genuine  churchly 
and  liturgical  spirit.  The  rhythm  is  still  irregular,  and  of 
rhyme  only  imperfect  beginnings  appear ;  and  in  this  respect 
they  certainly  fall  far  below  the  softer  and  richer  melodies  of 
the  middle  age,  which  are  more  engaging  to  ear  and  heart. 
They  are  an  altar  of  unpolished  and  unhewn  stone.  They  set' 
forth  the  great  objects  of  faith  with  apparent  coldness  that 
stands  aloof  from  them  in  distant  adoration ;  but  the  passion 
is  there,  though  latent,  and  the  fire  of  an  austere  enthusiasm 
burns  beneath  the  surface.  Many  of  them  have,  in  addition 
to  their  poetical  value,  a  historical  and  theological  value  as 
testimonies  of  orthodoxy  against  Arianism.'^ 

'  The  Latin  has  S  stanzas.     See  Daniel,  Thesaur.  hynonol.  torn.  i.  p.  1. 

"^  Trench  sees  in  the  Ambrosian  hymns,  not  without  reason  (1.  c.  p,  86),  "  a  rock- 
like firmness,  the  old  Roman  stoicism  transmuted  and  glorified  into  that  nobler 
Christian  courage,  which  encountered  and  at  length  overcame  the  world."  Fortlage 
judged  the  same  way  before  in  a  brilliant  description  of  Latin  hymns,  1.  c.  p.  4  fo 
comp.  Daniel,  Cod.  lit.  iii.  p.  282  scj. 


116.      THE   LATm   POETS   AKD   HTilXS. 


591 


Of  the  thirty  to  a  hundred  so-called  Ambrosian  hymns,* 
however,  only  twelve,  in  the  view  of  the  Benedictine  editors 
of  his  works,  are  genuine ;  the  rest  being  more  or  less  success- 
ful imitations  by  unknown  authors.  Neale  reduces  the  num- 
ber of  the  genuine  Ambrosian  hymns  to  ten,  and  excludes  all 
which  rhyme  regularly,  and  those  which  are  not  metrical. 
Among  the  genuine  are  the  morning  h^nnn :  "  Sterne  rerum 
conditor ;  " '  the  evening  hymn :  "  Deus  creator  omnium ;  "  ' 
and  the  Advent  or  Christmas  hymn:  "  Yeni,  Eedemptor  gen- 
tium." This  last  is  justly  considered  his  best.  It  has  been 
frequently  reproduced  in  modern  languages,*  and  we  add  this 
specimen  of  its  matter  and  form  with  an  English  version : 


"  Yeni,  Eedemptor  gentium, 
Ostende  partum  Yirginis ; 
Miretur  omne  saeculum : 
Talis  paxtus  decet  Deum. 

X Non  ex  virili  semine, 
Sed  mystico  spiramine, 
Verbum  Dei  factum  est  caro, 
Fructusque  ventris  floruit. 

XaIvus  tumescit  Yirginis, 
Claustrum  pudoris  permanet, 
Yexilla  virtutum  micant, 
Yersatur  in  templo  Deus. 


"  Come,  Thou  Redeemer  of  the  earth, 
Come,  testify  Thy  Yirgin  Birth : 
All  lands  admire — all  times  applaud : 
Such  is  the  birth  that  fits  a  God. 

"  Begotten  of  no  human  will, 
But  of  the  Spirit,  mystic  still. 
The  Word  of  God,  in  flesh  arrayed, 
The  promised  fruit  to  man  displayed. 

"  The  Yirgin  womb  that  burden  gained 
With  Yirgin  honor  all  unstained : 
The  banners  there  of  virtues  glow : 
God  in  His  Temple  dwells  below. 


*  Daniel,  ii.  pp.  12-115. 

'  The  genuineness  of  this  hymn  is  put  beyond  question  by  two  quotations  of  the 
contemporary  and  friend  of  Ambrose,  Augustine,  Confess,  ix.  12,  and  Retract,  i.  12, 
and  by  the  affinity  of  it  with  a  passage  in  the  Hexaemeron  of  Ambrose,  xxiv.  88, 
where  the  same  thoughts  are  expressed  in  prose.  Not  so  certain  is  the  genuineness 
of  the  other  Ambrosian  morning  hymns:  "./Etema  coeli  gloria,"  and  "Splendor  ,  ^ 

patemffi  <Tlorice."  '"^'•^"/     C^--nLi.—<Z   7/i.c-rt\  A^^X**-^  ^  i^k  n.^t-^rXvyw*--'-.  e«.A..^  «A-vj(~tr«-<-v.»«."-  '"" 

^  The  other  evening  hymn :  "  0  lux  beata  Trinitas,"  ascribed  to  him  (in  the 
Roman  Breviary  and  in  Daniel's  Thesaur.  i.  36),  is  scarcely  from  Ambrose :  it  has 
already  the  rhyme  in  the  form  as  we  find  it  in  the  hymns  of  Fortimatus. 

*  Especially  in  the  beautiful  German  by  John  Frank:  "Komm,  Heidenheiland, 
Losegeld,"  which  is  a  free  recomposition  rather  than  a  translation.  ^For  another 


^7- 


English  version  (abridged),  we  "  The  Yoice  of  Christian  Life  in  Song,"  p.  97 : 


i.  rim   v>*«.i^3.    -^ 


"^iL/Nt^ 


^ 


(de<n^. 


"  Redeemer  of  the  nations,  come ; 
Pure  oSspring  of  the  Virgin's  womb. 
Seed  of  the  woman,  promised  long. 
Let  ages  swell  Thine  advent  song."     , 

£t4^r»*>V    fWi  -^--*'    7^^ 
/^  ^,  /kit^-d.  (i^4r^.  '^y.t.jLj 


/?«f. 


/ 


^  ztKfMr , 


592 


THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


"Procedit  e  thalamo  suo, 
Pudoris  aula  regia, 
Gemiuffi  Gigas  substantlse, 
Alacris  ut  currat  viam.^ 

**  Egressus  ejus  a  Patre, 
Kegressus  ejus  ad  Patrem, 
Excursus  usque  ad  inferos, 
Recursus  ad  sedem  Dei. 

"  Squalls  setemo  Patri, 
Carnis  tropseo^  cingere, 
Infirma  nostri  corporis 
Virtute  firmans  perpeti. 

"  Praesepe  jam  fulget  tuum, 
Lumenque  nox  spirat  novum, 
Quod  nulla  nox  interpolet, 
Fideque  jugi  luceat." 


."Proceeding  from  His  chamber  free, 
The  royal  hall  of  chastity, 
Giant  of  twofold  substance,  straight 
His  destined  way  He  runs  elate. 

'^From  God  the  Father  He  proceeds. 
To  God  the  Father  back  He  speeds : 
Proceeds — as  far  as  very  heU : 
Speeds  back — to  light  ineffable. 

■"  0  equal  to  the  Father,  Thou  ! 
Gird  on  Thy  fleshly  trophy  (mantle)  now ! 
The  weakness  of  our  mortal  state 
With  deathless  might  invigorate. 

"  Thy  cradle  here  shall  gUtter  bright, 
And  darkness  breathe  a  newer  Ught, 
Where  endless  faith  shall  shine  serene, 
And  twihght  never  mtervene." 


By  far  the  most  celebrated  hymn  of  the  Milanese  bishop, 
which  alone  would  have  made  his  name  immortal,  is  the 
Ambrosian  doxology,  Te  Deum  laudanms.  This,  with  the 
Gloria  in  excelsis,  is.  as  already  remarked,  by  far  the  most 
valuable  legacy  of  the  old  Catholic  church  poetry ;  and  will 
be  prayed  and  sung  with  devotion  in  all  parts  of  Christendom 
to  the  end  of  time.  According  to  an  old  legend,  Ambrose 
composed  it  on  the  baptism  of  St.  Augustine,  and  conjointly 
with  him ;  the  two,  without  preconcert,  as  if  from  divine  inspi- 
ration, alternately  singing  the  words  of  it  before  the  congrega- 
tion. But  his  biographer  Paulinus  says  nothing  of  this,  and, 
according  to  later  investigations,  this  sublime  Christian  psalm 
is,  like  the  Gloria  in  excclsis,  but  a  free  reproduction  and  expan- 
sion of  an  older  Greek  hymn  in  prose,  of  which  some  constitu- 
ents ap]3ear  in  the  Apostolic  Constitutions,  and  elsewhere.^ 

*  This  is  an  allusion  to  the  "  giants "  of  Gen.  vi.  4,  who,  in  the  early  church, 
wtre  supposed  to  have  been  of  a  double  substance,  being  the  offspring  of  the  "  sons 
of  God,"  or  angels,  and  the  "  daughters  of  men,"  and  who  furnished  a  forced  re- 
semblance to  the  twofold  nature  of  Christ,  according  to  the  mystical  interpretation  of 
,yj(^cit/>y^^s^jpx.  6.     Comp.  Ambr.  De  incamat.  Domini,  c.  5.  /*•  *^--  <i><^  *a.l^^>u^ 


..>4!rrr-> 


On  the  difference  of  reading,  tropceo,  trophcco,  and  stropheo  or  strqnhio  (stro- 


j_  Sitwv^   phium  =  "cineuMlum  aureum  cum  gemniis"),  see  Daniel,  torn.  i.  p.  14 
•.>- 1^^>,  ,^ji       '  For  instance,  the  beginning  of  a  morning  hymn,  in  the  Codex  Alexandrinus  of 
*  ^^,t^\',a      the  Bible,  has  been  Uterally  incorporated  into  the  Te  Deum: 


I 


y 


§    116.      THE   LATIN   POETS   JLND   HYMNS. 


59^ 


Ambrose  introduced  also  an  improved  mode  of  singing  in 
Milan,  making  wise  use  of  tlie  Greek  symphonies  and  antiplio- 
nies,  and  popular  melodies.  This  Cantus  Amh^osianus,  or 
figural  song,  soon  supplanted  the  former  mode  of  reciting  the 
Psalms  and  prayers  in  monotone  with  musical  accent  and 
little  modulation  of  the  voice,  and  spread  into  most  of  the 
Western  churches  as  a  congregational  song.  It  afterwards 
degenerated,  and  was  improved  and  simplified  by  Gregory  the 
Great,  and  gave  place  to  the  so-called  Cantus  Romanus,  or 

.  choralis. 

^^''^AuGusTiNE,  the  greatest  theologian  among  the  church 
fathers  (f  430),  whose  soul  was  filled  with  the  genuine  essence 
of  poetry,  is  said  to  have  composed  the  resurrection  hymn : 
"  Cum  rex  gloriee  Christus ;  "  the  hymn  on  the  glory  of  para- 
dise :  "  Ad  perennis  vitse  fontem  mens  sitivit  arida ; "  and 
others.  But  he  probably  only  fiii'nished  in  the  lofty  poetical 
intuitions  and  thoughts  which  are  scattered  through  his  prose 
works,  especially  in  the  Confessions,  the  materia  carminis  for 
later  poets,  like  Peter  Damiani,  bishop  of  Ostia,  in  the  eleventh 
centmy,  who  put  into  flowing  verse  Augustine's  meditations 
on  the  blessedness  of  heaven.^ 


Ka^'  l/cacTTTjv  Tjfxipav  ev\oyriaaj  cre,  Per  singulos  dies  benedicimus  te, 

Kcd  alveaco  rb  ovoixd  aov  els  rhv  alciiva  Et  laudamus  nomen  tuum  in  sseculum 

Kot  ets  rhv  alSiva  rov  aloivos.  Et  in  sfficulum  sseculi. 

Karai,i.waovj  Kvpte,  Kal  Tr)v  7]fj.(pav  TavTTjv  Dignare,  Domine,  die  isto 

'Ava/jiapT^jrovs  <pv\ax^rivai  rj/xas.  Sine  peccato  nos  custodire. 

Comp.  on  this  whole  hymn  the  critical  investigation  of  Daniel,  1.  c.  vol.  ii.  p.  289 

sqq. 

'  This  beautiful  hymn,  "  De  gloria  et  gaudiis  Paradisi,"  is  found  in  the  appendix 
to  the  6th  volume  of  the  Benedictine  edition  of  the  Opera  Augustini,  in  Daniel's 
Thesaurus,  tom.  i.  p.  116,  and  in  Trench's  Collection,  p.  315  sqq.,  and  elsewhere. 
Like  all  the  new  Jerusalem  hjTnns  it  derives  its  inspiration  from  St.  John's  descrip- 
tion in  the  concluding  chapters  of  the  Apocalypse.  There  is  an  excellent  German 
translation  of  it  by  Konigsfeld  and  an  English  translation  by  Wackcrbarth,  given  in 
part  by  Neale  in  his  Mediaeval  Hymns  and  Sequences,  p.  &&;  The  whole  hyron  is 
very  fine,  but  not  quite  equal  to  the  long  poem  of  Bernard  of  Cluny  (in  the  twelfth 
century),  on  the  contempt  of  the  world,  which  breathes  the  same  sweet  home-sick- 
ness to  heaven,  and  which  Neale  (p.  JS)  justly  regards  as  the  most  lovely,  in  the 
same  way  that  the  Dies  irce  is  the  most  sublime,  and  the  Stabai  Mater  the  most 
pathetic,  of  mediaeval  hymns.    The  original  has  not  less  than  3,000  lines;  Neale  > 

gives  an  admirable  translation  of  the  canalwdiug  part-,- commencing  "Hie  hcesc   <^  y*^' *i'.^ t. 
VOL.  II.— 38  r'W^f  iwi 


'7^ 


1-4. 


W 


594  THTKD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Damasus,  bishop  of  Rome  (f  384),  a  friend  of  Jerome, 
likewise  composed  some  few  sacred  songs,  and  is  considered 
tlie  author  of  tlie  rhyme.' 

CcELius  Sedulius,  a  native  of  Scotland  or  Ireland,  presbyter 
in  the  first  half  of  the  fifth  century,  composed  the  hymns: 
"  Herodes,  hostis  impie,"  and  "  A  solis  ortus  cardine,"  and 
some  larger  poems. 

Marcus  Aurelius  Clemens  Prudentius  (f  405),  an  advo- 
cate and  imperial  governor  in  Spain  under  Theodosius,  devoted 
the  last  years  of  his  life  to  religious  contemplation  and  the 
writing  of  sacred  poetry,  and  stands  at  the  head  of  the  more 
fiery  and  impassioned  Spanish  school.  Bently  calls  him  the 
Horace  and  Yirgil  of  Christians,  Neale,  "  the  prince  of  primi- 
tive Christian  poets."  Prudentius  is  undoubtedly  the  most 
gifted  and  fruitful  of  the  old  Catholic  poets.  He  was  master 
of  the  classic  measure,  but  admirably  understood  how  to  clothe 
the  new  ideas  and  feelings  of  Christianity  in  a  new  dress.  His 
poems  have  been  repeatedly  edited.''  They  are  in  some  cases 
long  didactic  or  epic  productions  in  hexameters,  of  much 
historical  value ; '  in  others,  collections  of  epic  poems,  as  the 

4iisd±UF,"  and  a  part  of  this  translation:  "To  thee,  0  dear,  dear  Country"  (p.  St),  is 

well  worthy  of  a  place  in  our  hymn  books.  ■  Eceoi  theee-asd-  et»ilaf  modifcval 

sewpces'Xas  the  "Urbs  beata  Jerusalem,"- &e;)  is  derived  in  part  the  famous  Enghsh 

hymn :  "  0  mother  dear,  Jerusalem ! "  (in  31  stanzas),  which  is  often  ascribed  to 

David  Dickson,'  a  Scotch  clergyman  of  the  seventeenth  century,  and  which  has  in 

■•.»,\«  turn  become  the  mother  of  many  English  hymns  on  the  new  Jerusalem.     (Comp.  on 

t  '    UhJt"''^^  ^^^  monographs  of  H.  Bonar,  Edinb.  1852,  and  of  W.  C_J'rime:  "0  Mother  dear, 

7       I       Jerusalem,"  New  York,  1865.) — To  Augustine  is  also  ascribed  ihe  hymn:  "0  gens 

beata  coelitum,"  a  picture  of  the  blessedness  of  the  inhabitants  of  heaven,  and : 

''■  Quid,  tyranne !  quid  miraris  ?  "  an  antidote  for  the  tyranny  of  sin.    ... 

'■  Jerome  (De  viris  ill.  c.  103)  says  of  him :  "  Elegans  in  versibus  componendia 
ingenium  habet,  multaque  et  brevia  metro  edidit."    Neale  omits  Damasus  altogether- 
"*»  Daniel,  Thes.  i.  pp.  8  and  9,  gives  only  two  of  his  hymns,  a  Hymnus  de  S.  Andrea, 

and  a  Hymnus  de  S.  Agatha,  the  latter  with  regular  rhymes,  conmiencing : 
"  Martyris  ecce  dies  Agathae  Christus  earn  sibi  qua  sociat 

Virginis  emicat  eximia3,  Et  diadema  duplex  decorat." 

-  E.  g.,  by  Th.  Obbarius,  Tub.  1845 ;  and  by  Alb.  Drcssel,  Lips.  1860.'^  ■  •        " 
'  The  Apotheosis,  a  celebration  of  the  divinity  of  Christ  against  its  opponents  (in 
1,063  Unes);  the  Harmaiigenia,  on  the  origin  of  sin  (in  966  lines);  the  Fsi/cJioma- 
ckia,  on  the  warfare  of  good  and  evil  in  the  soul  (915  lines);  Contra  Symmachum, 
on  idolatry,  &c. 


:»  ^  ,.'  %L 


*^  jj  ir  Y  r^]    'fli~i^'atA^^     ^^-»t,.^K^   <r*>-  <^  n^tJL*.e.u^   f^V-iC*i£y    /V>«»*«ce<>^ 


;|/ 


fp 


^: 


^t-^^>  > » >  %-^ 


/^C<2^^ 


^»e-«/^ 


'i^ 


^»^i*< 


'y 


-^ 


'i./^-c-r 


.i-t^^ 


C^  t-^a^/^^^Ce^  z^^^*-*!'--*'^ 


,^t^-y--i-«^i/' 


>  »-  ^-£-*l^f 


ty^^t.^-t-'c^o^X^  ^-^^  '*'  ^^  ^»  < 


,y^-^-^^^ 


^«!*T!e- 


':^^^5^^^^^5^^.^i^^^^«  ^^^^  ^j/^^U-^^^  t^  yCa^^  ^^c-*,t^  ^O^  ^yCy-^ 


^-^^^ 


/ 


^n^-c-c^    <^<'.rf«>i^?SZZ-e-*^ 


^^^/£^1^^^.™^ 


«5»/^«-'2,<S^»--*-«^^t*^    ^<^e^   . 


^ 


c^  /^^i^-S*:-^ 


,^^^^.'/6^«^i<.'ZuS'<«i^'^i^<5*--«^<i^<5^tV^ 


7' 


^ 


V''^  .^^^-<*-*-*e'^-'    ^-^^'-i^^^^<^-«e-^-  f      VV'^'^fc^jC^ 


§   116.      THE  LATIN   POETS    AXD   HTUXS. 


595 


Caihemerinon^  and  Peristephanon."^  Extracts  from  the  latter 
have  passed  into  public  use.  The  Lest  known  hymns  of  Prn- 
dentins  are :  "  Salvete,  flores  martyrum,"  in  memory  of  the 
massacred  innocents  at  Bethlehem,^  and  his  grand  bm-ial 
hymn :  "  Jam  mcesta  quiesce  querela,"  wliich  brings  before 
us  the  ancient  worship  in  deserts  and  in  catacombs,  and  of 
■which  Herder  says  that  no  one  can  read  it  without  feeling  his 

^-^^^eart  moved  by  its  touching  tones.* 

^^^^"""^Tq,  must  mention  two  more  poets  who  form  the  transition 
from  the  ancient  Catholic  to  mediaeval  church  poetry. 

Yenantius  Fortunatus,  an  Italian  by  birth,  a  friend  of 
queen  Radegunde  (who  lived  apart  from  her  husband,  and 
presided  over  a  cloister),  the  fashionable  poet  of  France,  and 
at  the  time  of  his  death  (about  600),  bishop  of  Poitiers,  wrote 
eleven  books  of  poems  on  various  subjects,  an  epic  on  the  life 
of  St.  Martin  of  Tours,  and  a  theological  work  in  vindication 
of  the  Augustinian  doctrine  of  divine  grace.  He  was  the  first 
to  use  the  rhyme  with  a  certain  degree  of  mastery  and  regu- 
larity, although  with  considerable  license  still,  so  that  many 
of  his  rhymes  are  mere  alliterations  of  consonants  or  repetitions 
of  vowels.^    He  first  mastered  the  trochaic  tetrameter,  a  meas- 

^  Kad7j;uepiviii'  =  Diurnorum  (the  Christian  Day,  as  we  might  call  it,  after  the 
analogy  of  Keble's  Christian  Year),  hymns  for  the  several  hours  of  the  day. 

^  Uipl  (TTecpdvui',  concerning  the  crowns,  fourteen  hymns  on  as  many  martyrs 
who  have  inherited  the  crown  of  eternal  life.  Many  of  them  are  intolerably  tedious 
and  in  bad  taste. 

'  Be  SS.  InnocentiJms,  from  the  twelfth  book  of  the  Cathemerinon,  in  Prudentii 
Carmina,  ed.  Obbarius,  Tub.  1845,  p.  48,  in  Daniel,  torn.  i.  p.  124,  and  in  Trench, 
p.  121. 

*  It  is  the  close  of  the  tenth  Cathemerinon,  and  was  the  usual  burial  hymn  of 
the  ancient  church.     It  has  been  translated  into  German  by  Weiss,  Knapp,  Puchta, 
Konigsfeld,  Bassler,  SchafF  (in  his  Deutsches  Gesangbuch,  No.  468),  and  others. 
Trench,  p.  281,  calls  it  "the  crowning  glory  of  the  poetry  of  Prudentius.''     He 
never  attained  this  grandeur  on  any  other  occasion.     Neale,  in  his  treatise  on  the 
Eccles.  Latin  Poetry,  1.  c.  p.  22,  gives  translations  of  several  parts  of  it,  in  the 
metre  of  the  original,  but  without  rhyme,  commencing  thus : 
"  Each  sorrowful  mourner  be  silent ! 
Fond  mothers,  give  over  your  weeping ! 
None  grieve  for  those  pledges  as  perished : 
This  dying  is  life's  reparation." 
Anotireriranslauon  by  E.  Caswall :  "  Cease,  ye  tearful  mourners." 

'  Such  as  prodeunt — mysterium,  viscera — vestigia,  fulgida — purpura,  etc. 


596 


THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


lire  which,  with  various  modifications,  subsequently  became 
the  glory  of  the  mediseval  hymn.  Prudentius  had  already 
used  it  once  or  twice,  but  Fortunatus  fii'st  grouped  it  into 
stanzas.  His  best  known  compositions  are  the  passion  hymns  : 
"'Vexilla  regis  prodeuut,"  and  "Pange,  lingua,  gloriosi  proelium 
(lauream)  certaminis,"  which,  though  not  without  some  altera- 
tions, have  passed  into  the  Eoman  Breviary.'  The  "  Vexilla 
regis  "  is  sung  on  Good  Friday  dm-ing  the  procession  in  which 
the  consecrated  host  is  earned  to  the  altar.  Both  are  used  on 
the  festivals  of  the  Invention  and  the  Elevation  of  the  Cross.* 
The  favorite  Catholic  hymn  to  Mary :  "Ave  maris  stella,"  '  is 
sometimes  ascribed  to  him,  but  is  of  a  much  later  date. 

We  give   as  specimens  his  two  famous  passion  hymns, 
which  were  composed  about  580. 

Vexilla  Regis  Prodeunt.^ 


"  Texilla  regia  prodeunt, 
Fulget  crucis  mysterium, 
Quo  carne  camis  conditor 
Suspensus  est  patibulo.* 

>*  Quo  vulneratus  insuper 
Mucrone  diro  lanceae, 
Ut  nos  lavaret  crimine 
Manavit  unda  et  sanguine. 

/'  Impleta  sunt  quae  concinit 
David  fideli  carmine 
Dicens :  in  nationibus 
Eegnavit  a  ligno  Deus. 


"  The  Royal  Banners  forward  go : 
The  Cross  shines  forth  with  mystic  glow : 
Where  He  in  flesh,  our  flesh  who  made, 
Our  sentence  bore,  our  ransom  paid. 

'"  Where  deep  for  us  the  spear  was  dyed, 
Life's  torrent  rushing  from  His  side : 
To  wash  us  in  the  precious  flood. 
Where  mingled  water  flowed,  and  blood. 

>^ Fulfilled  is  all  that  David  told 
In  true  prophetic  song  of  old : 
Amidst  the  nations/God,  saith  he, 
Hath  reigned  and   triumphed   from  the 
Tree. 


/ 


u 


'  Daniel,  Thes.  i.  p.  160  sqq.,  gives  both  forms :  the  original,  and  that  of  the 
Brev.  Romammi. 

"^  Trench  has  omitted  both  in  his  Collection,  and  admitted  instead  of  them  some 
less  valuable  poems  of  Fortunatus,  De  cruce  Christi,  and  De  passione  Domini,  in 
hexameters. 

=>  Daniel,  i.  p.  204. 

■•  The  original  text  in  Daniel,  i.  p.  160.  The  translation  by  Neale,  from  the 
Hymnal  of  the  English  Ecclesiological  Society,  and  Neale's  Medieval  Hymns,  p.  6. 
It  omits  the  second  stanza,  as  docs  the  Eoman  Breviary. 

^  The  Roman  Breviary  substitutes  for  the  last  two  lines : 
"  Qua  vita  mortem  pertulit 
Et  morte  vitara  protullt." 


§    116.      THE   LATIN   POETS   AND   HYMNS.  597 

"Arbor  decora  et  fulgida  ^''O  Tree  of  Beauty !     Tree  of  Light ! 
Omata  regis  purpura,  0  Tree  with  royal  purple  dight ! 

Electa  digno  stipite  Elect  upon  whose  faithful  breast 

Tam  sancta  membra  tangere.  Those  holy  limbs  should  find  their  rest ! 

"Beata  cuius  brachiis  *  On  whose  dear  arms,  so  widely  flung, 
Pretium  pependit  soeculi,  The  weight  of  this  world's  ransom  hung, 

Statera  facta  sfficuli  The  price  of  human  kind  to  pay, 

Praedamque  tulit  tartaris." '  And  spoil  the  spoiler  of  his  prey  !  " 


Pange,  Lingua,  Gloriosi  Pr odium  Certaminis.' 

"  Sing,  my  tongue,  the  glorious  battle,^  with  completed  victory  rife. 
And  above  the  Cross's  trophy,  tell  the  triumph  of  the  strife ; 
How  the  world's  Redeemer  conquer'd,  by  surrendering  of  His  life. 


If^' 


"  God,  his  Maker,  sorely  grieving  that  the  first-bom  Adam  fell, 
When  he  ate  the  noxious  ^pple,  M:Iiose  reward  was  death  and  heU,  "^  /^^^ 

Noted  then  this  wood,  the  ruin  of  the  ancient  wood  to  quell. 

/ For  the  work  of  our  Salvation  needs  would  have  his  order  so, 
And  the  multiform  deceiver's  art  by  art  would  overthrow ; 
And  from  thence  would  bring  the  medicine  whence  the  venom  of  the  foe. 

7  Wherefore,  when  the  sacred  fulness  of  the  appointed  time  was  come,       •-^^.i^a-  «^^ 
This  world's  Maker  left  His  Father,  left  His  bright  and  heavenly  home,    cj^ 
And  proceeded,  God  Incarnate,  of  the  Virgin's  holy  womb. 

■   *  Weeps  the  Infant  in  the  manger  that  in  Bethlehem's  stable  stands ; 
And  His  limbs  the  Virgin  Mother  doth  compose  in  swaddling  bands, 
Meetly  thus  in  linen  folding  of  her  God  the  feet  and  hands. 

'^  Thirty  years  among  us  dwelling.  His  appointed  tune  fulfilled. 
Bom  for  this.  He  meets  His  Passion,  for  that  this  He  freely  willed : 
On  the  Cross  the  Lamb  is  lifted,  where  His  life-blood  shall  be  spilled. 

:  He  endured  the  shame  and  spitting,  vinegar,  and  nails,  and  reed;  -tt-a-'-'^^-'^^-^^ —   .    '  '"^ 

'As  His  blessed  side  is  opened, -water  thence  and  blood  proceed:     ■     -.^y,  iF^:^C^c^ 
Earth,  and  sky,  and  stars,  and  ocean,  by  that  flood  are  cleansed  indeed.  jA  -  ■•- 

'  Brev.  Rom. :  "  Tulitque  prajdam  tartari." 

'■^  See  the  original,  which  is  not  rhymed,  in  Daniel,  i.  p.  163  sqq.,  and  in  some- 
what different  form  in  the  Roman  Breviary.  The  masterly  English  translation  in 
the  metre  of  the  original  is  Neale's,  1.  c.  p.  23*7  sq.,  and  in  his  Medieval  Hymns  and/7  .  /)(] 


Sequences,  p.  1.  \  There  is  another  excellent  English  version  by  E.  Ga^aii, 

^  Fneuum  certaminis,  which  the  Roman  Breviary  spoiled  by  substituting  lau-  ^ , 

ream.     The  poet  describes  the  glory  of  the  struggle  itself  rather  than  the  glory  of 
its  termination,  as  is  plain  from  the  conclusion  of  the  verse. 


d)  Vi^^t 


598  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

.-"  Faithful  Cross !  above  all  other,  one  and  only  noble  Tree !  • 
Xone  in  fohage,  none  in  blossom,  none  in  fruit  thy  peers  may  be ; 
Sweetest  wood  and  sweetest  iron,  sweetest  weight  is  hung  on  thee!' 

•"  Bend  thy  boughs,  0  Tree  of  Glory !  thy  relaxmg  sinews  bend ; 
For  awhile  the  ancient  rigor,  that  thy  birth  bestowed,  suspend ; 
And  the  King  of  heavenly  beauty  on  tliy  bosom  gently  tend. 

"  Thou  alone  wast  counted  worthy  this  world's  ransom  to  uphold ; 
For  a  shipwreck'd  race  preparing  harbor,  like  the  Ark  of  old : 
"With  the  sacred  blood  anointed  from  the  wounded  Lamb  that  roll'd. 

."  Laud  and  honor  to  the  Father,  laud  and  honor  to  the  Son, 
Laud  and  honor  to  the  Spirit,  ever  Three  and  ever  One : 
Consubstantial,  co-eternal,  while  unending  ages  run. 

Far  less  important  as  a  poet  is  Gkegoky  I.  (590-60i),  the 
last  of  the  fathers  and  the  first  of  the  mediaeval  popes.  Many 
hymns  of  doubtful  origin  have  been  ascribed  to  him  and 
received  into  the  Breviary.  The  best  is  his  Sunday  hymn : 
''  Primo  dierum  omnium."  "^ 

The  hymns  are  the  fairest  flowers  of  the  poetry  of  the 
ancient  church.  But  besides  them  many  epic  and  didactic 
poems  arose,  especially  in  Gaul  and  Spain,  which  counteracted 
the  invading  flood  of  barbarism,  and  contributed  to  preserve  a 
connection  with  the  treasui'es  of  the  classic  culture.  Juvencus, 
a  Spanish  presbyter  under  Constantine,  composed  the  first 
Christian  epic,  a  Gospel  history  in  four  books  (3,226  lines),  on 
the  model  of  Yirgil,  but  as  to  poetic  merit  never  rising  above 
mediocrity.  Far  superior  to  him  is  PEUDENTnis  (f  405) ;  he 
wrote,  besides  the  hymns  already  mentioned,  several  didactic, 
epic,  and  polemic  poems.  St.  Pontius  PArLiNtrs,  bishop  of  jSTola 
(f  431),  who  was  led  by  the  poet  Ausonius  to  the  mysteries 
of  the  Muses,'  and  a  friend  of  Augustine  and  Jerome,  is  the 

'  The  Latin  of  this  stanza  is  a  jewel : 

"  Crux  fidehs,  inter  omncs  arbor  una  nobihs  ! 
Nulla  talem  silva  profert  fronde,  flore,  germine : 
Dulce  lignum,  dulci  clavo,  dulce  pondus  sustinens." 
(In  the  Roman  Breviary :  "  Dulce  ferrum,  dulce  lignum,  dulce  pondus  sustinent.") 

"^  See  Daniel's  Cod.  i.  p.  175  sqq.     For  an  excellent  Enghsh  version  of  the  hymn 
above  alluded  to,  see  Xeale,  1.  c.  p.  233. 

^  Ausonius  yielded  the  palm  to  his  pupil  when  he  wrote  of  the  verses  of  Pauli- 

nus: 

"  Cedimus  ingenio,  quantum  pracedimus  aevo : 
Assurget  Musse  nostra  camcena  tuas." 


§   116.      THE   LATIN   POETS   AND   HYMNS.  599 

autlior  of  some  thirty  poems  full  of  devont  spirit ;  the  best  are 
those  on  the  festival  of  S.  Felix,  his  patron.  Pkosper  Aqui- 
TANTJS  (t  460),  layman,  and  friend  of  Augustine,  wrote  a  didac- 
tic poem  against  the  Pelagians,  and  several  epigrams ;  Avitus, 
bishop  of  Vienne  (f  523),  an  epic  on  the  creation  and  the 
origin  of  evil ;  Aratoe,  a  court  official  under  Justinian,  after- 
wards a  sub-deacon  of  the  Roman  church  (about  544),  a  para- 
phrase, in  heroic  verse,  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  in  two 
books  of  about  1,800  lines.  Clattdiantjs  MA^rKBTUS,'  Benedic- 
Ttis  Paulintjs,  Elpidius,  Okontits,  and  Deacontitts  are  unim- 
portant. 

'  Not  to  be  confounded  with  Claudius  Claudianus,  of  Alexandria,  the  most 
^fted  Latin  poet  at  the  end  of  the  fourth  and  beginning  of  the  fifth  century.  The 
Christian  Idyls,  Epistles,  and  Epigrams  ascribed  to  him,  were  probably  the  work 
of  Claudianus  Mamertus,  of  Yienne  (comp.  H.  Thompson's  Manual  of  Rom.  Lit.  p. 
204,  and  J.  J.  Brunet's  Manual  du  Hbraire,  tom.  iii.  p.  1351  of  the  5th  ed.  Par. 
1862).  For  Claudius  Claudianus  was  a  heathen,  according  to  the  express  testimony 
of  Paulus  Orosius  and  of  Augustine  (De  civit.  Dei,  v.  p.  26 :  "  Poeta  Claudianus, 
quamvis  a  Christi  nomine  alienus,"  &c.),  and  in  one  of  his  own  epigrams,  In  Jaco- 
bum,  magistrum  equitum,  shows  his  contempt  of  the  Christian  religion. 


CHAPTEE  IX. 


THEOLOGICAL  CONTEOVERSIES,  Aim   DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE 
ECUMENICAL  ORTHODOXY. 


§  117.     General  Observations.     Doctrmal  Importance  of  the 
Period.     Influence  of  the  Ancient  Philosophy. 

The  ITicene  and  Clialcedonian  age  is  tlie  period  of  the 
formation  and  ecclesiastical  settlement  of  tlie  ecumenical 
orthodoxy ;  that  is,  the  doctrines  of  the  holy  trinity  and  of  the 
incarnation  and  the  divine-human  person  of  Christ,  in  which 
the  Greek,  Latin,  and  evangelical  churches  to  this  day  in  their 
symbolical  books  agree,  in  opposition  to  the  heresies  of  Arian- 
ism  and  Apollinarianism,  llTestorianism  and  Eutychianism. 
Besides  these  trinitarian  and  christological  doctrines,  anthro- 
pology also,  and  soteriology,  particularly  the  doctrines  of  sin 
and  grace,  in  opposition  to  Pelagianism  and  Semi-Pelagianism, 
■were  developed  and  brought  to  a  relative  settlement;  only, 
however,  in  the  Latin  church,  for  the  Greek  took  very  little 
part  in  the  Pelagian  controversy. 

The  fundamental  nature  of  these  doctrines,  the  greatness 
of  the  church  fathers  who  were  occupied  with  them,  and  the 
importance  of  the  result,  give  this  period  the  first  place  after 
the  apostolic  in  the  history  of  theology.  In  no  jDcriod,  except- 
ing the  Peformation  of  the  sixteentli  century,  have  there  been 
so  momentous  and  earnest  controversies  in  doctrine,  and  so 
lively  an  interest  in  them.  The  church  was  now  in  possession 
of  the  ancient  philosophy  and  learning  of  the  Poman  empire, 


§   llY.       DOCTEINAL   IMPORTANCE,    ETC.  601 

and  applied  tliem  to  the  unfolding  and  vindication  of  the 
Christian  truth.  In  the  lead  of  these  controversies  stood  church 
teachers  of  imposing  talents  and  energetic  piety,  not  mere 
book  men,  but  venerable  theological  characters,  men  all  of  a 
piece,  as  great  in  acting  and  suffering  as  in  thinking.  To 
them  theology  was  a  sacred  business  of  heart  and  life,'  and 
upon  them  we  may  pass  the  judgment  of  Eusebius  respecting 
Origen :  "  Their  life  was  as  their  word,  and  their  word  was  as 
their  life." 

The  theological  controversies  absorbed  the  intellectual 
activity  of  that  time,  and  shook  the  foundations  of  the  church 
and  the  empire.  With  the  purest  zeal  for  truth  were  mingled 
much  of  the  odium  and  rabies  theologoruin,  and  the  whole 
host  of  theological  j)assions ;  which  are  the  deepest  and  most 
bitter  of  passions,  because  religion  is  concerned  with  eternal 
interests. 

The  leading  personages  in  these  controversies  were  of 
course  bishops  and  priests.  By  their  side  fought  the  monks, 
as  a  standing  army,  with  fanatical  zeal  for  the  victory  of 
orthodoxy,  or  not  seldom  in  behalf  even  of  heresy.  Emperors 
and  civil  officers  also  mixed  in  the  business  of  theology,  but 
for  the  most  part  to  the  prejudice  of  its  free,  internal  develop- 
ment ;  for  they  imparted  to  all  theological  questions  a  political 
character,  and  entangled  them  with  the  cabals  of  court  and  the 
secular  interests  of  the  day.  In  Constantmople,  during  the 
Arian  controversy,  all  classes,  even  mechanics,  bankers,  frip- 
pers,  market  women,  and  runaway  slaves  took  lively  part  in 
the  questions  of  Homousion  and  sub-ordination,  of  the  begotten 
and  the  unbegotten.* 

The  speculative  mind  of  the  Eastern  church  was  combined 

'  Or,  as  Gregory  Nazianzen  says  of  the  true  theologian,  contemplation  was  a  pre- 
lude to  action,  and  action  a  prelude  to  contemplation,  7rpa|ij  (a  religious  walk) 
€7rij3a(Tij  ae&jpias  (actio  gradus  est  ad  ^ontemplationem),  Oratio  xx.  12  (ed.  Bened. 
Paris,  tom.  i.  p.  383). 

*  So  Gregory  of  Xyssa  (not  Nazianzen,  as  J.  H.  Kurtz,  wrongly  quoting  from 
Ncander,  has  it  in  his  large  K.  Gesch.  i.  ii.  p.  99)  relates  from  his  own  observation: 
Orat.  de  Deitate  Filii  et  Spiritus  S.  (Opera  ii.  p.  898,  ed.  Paris,  of  1615).  He  com- 
pares his  cotemporaries  in  this  respect  with  the  Athenians,  who  are  always  wishing 
to  hear  some  new  thing. 


602  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

with  a  deep  religious  earnestness  and  a  certain  mysticism,  and 
at  the  same  time  with  the  Grecian  curiosity  and  disputatious- 
ness,  which  afterwards  rather  injured  than  promoted  her  in- 
ward life.  Gregory  IS'azianzen,  who  lived  in  Constantinople 
in  the  midst  of  the  Arian  wars,  describes  the  division  and 
hostility  which  this  polemic  spirit  introduced  between  parents 
and  children,  husbands  and  wives,  old  and  young,  masters  and 
slaves,  priests  and  people.  "  It  has  gone  so  far  that  the  whole 
market  resounds  with  the  discourses  of  heretics,  every  banquet 
is  corrupted  by  this  babbling  even  to  nausea,  every  merry- 
making is  transformed  into  a  mourning,  and  every  funeral 
solemnity  is  almost  alleviated  by  this  brawling  as  a  still  greater 
evil ;  even  the  chambers  of  women,  the  nm-series  of  simplicity, 
are  disturbed  thereby,  and  the  flowers  of  modesty  are  crushed 
by  this  precocious  practice  of  dispute." '  Chi-ysostom,  like 
Melanchthon  at  a  later  day,  had  much  to  sufler  from  the 
theological  pugnacity  of  his  times. 

The  history  of  the  Mcene  age  shows  clearly  that  the 
church  of  God  carries  the  heavenly  treasure  in  earthly  vessels. 
The  Keformation  of  the  sixteenth  century  was  likewise  in  fact 
an  incessant  war,  in  which  impure  personal  and  political 
motives  of  every  kind  had  play,  and  even  the  best  men  often 
violated  the  apostolic  injunction  to  speak  the  truth  in  love. 
But  we  must  not  forget  that  the  passionate  and  intolerant 
dogmatism  of  that  time  was  based  upon  deep  moral  earnest- 
ness and  strong  faith,  and  so  far  forth  stands  vastly  above  the 
tolerance  of  indiflferentism,  which  lightly  plays  with  the  truth 
or  not  rarely  strikes  out  in  most  vehement  intolerance  against 
the  faith.  (Remember  the  first  French  revolution.)  The 
overruling  of  divine  Providence  in  the  midst  of  these  wild 
conflicts  is  unmistakable,  and  the  victory  of  the  truth  appears 
the  greater  for  the  violence  of  error.  God  uses  all  sorts  of 
men  for  his  instruments,  and  brings  evil  passions  as  well  as 
good  into  his  service.  The  Spirit  of  truth  guided  the  church 
through  the  rush  and  the  din  of  contending  parties,  and  always 
triumphed  over  error  in  the  end. 

'  Orat.  xxvii.   2  (Opera,  torn.  i.  p.  488).     Comp.  Orat.  xsxii.  (torn.  i.  p.  581); 
Carmen  de  vita  sua,  vers.  1210  sqq.  (torn.  ii.  p.  TST  sq.). 


I 


I 


§   117.      DOCTRINAL   IMPORTAJSTCE,    ETC.  603 

The  ecumenical  councils  were  the  open  battle-nelds,  upon 
wliicli  the  victory  of  orthodoxy  was  decided.  The  doctrinal 
decrees  of  these  councils  contain  the  results  of  the  most  pro- 
found discussions  respecting  the  Trinity  and  the  person  of 
Christ ;  and  the  Church  to  this  day  has  not  gone  essentially 
beyond  those  decisions. 

The  Greek  church  wrought  out  Theology  and  Christology, 
while  the  Latin  church  devoted  itself  to  Anthropology  and 
Soteriology.  The  one,  true  to  the  genius  of  the  Greek  nation- 
ality, was  predominantly  speculative,  dialectical,  impulsive, 
and  restless ;  the  other,  in  keeping  with  the  Eonian  character, 
was  practical,  traditional,  uniform,  consistent,  and  steady. 
The  former  followed  the  stimulation  of  Origen  and  the  Alex- 
andrian school;  the  latter  received  its  impulse  from  Tertullian 
and  Cyprian,  and  reached  its  theological  height  in  Jerome  and 
Augustine.  The  speculative  inclination  of  the  Greek  church 
appeared  even  in  its  sermons,  which  not  rarely  treated  of  the 
number  of  worlds,  the  idea  of  matter,  the  different  classes  of 
higher  spirits,  the  relation  of  the  three  hypostases  in  the  God- 
head, and  similar  abstruse  questions.  The  Latin  church  also, 
however,  had  a  deep  spu'it  of  investigation  (as  we  see  in  Ter- 
tullian and  Augustine),  took  an  active  part  in  the  trinitarian 
and  clu-istological  controversies  of  the  East,  and  decided  the 
victory  of  orthodoxy  by  the  weight  of  its  authority.  The 
Greek  church  almost  exhausted  its  productive  force  in  those 
great  struggles,  proved  indifferent  to  the  deeper  conception  of 
sin  and  grace,  as  developed  by  Augustine,  and  after  the  coun- 
cil of  Chalcedon  degenerated  theologically  into  scholastic 
formalism  and  idle  refinements. 

The  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  are  the  flourishing,  classical 
period  of  the  patristic  theology  and  of  the  Christian  Grseco- 
Roman  civilization.  In  the  second  half  of  the  fifth  century 
the  West  Roman  empire,  with  these  literary  treasures,  went , 
down  amidst  the  storms  of  the  great  migration,  to  take  a  new  * 
and  higher  sweep  in  the  Germano-Roman  form  under  Cliarle- 
magne.  In  the  Eastern  empire  scholarship  was  better  main- 
tained, and  a  certain  connection  with  antiquity  was  preserved 
through  the  medium  of  the  Greek  language.     But  as  the  Greek 


'%  >•,  .V. 

''•'«M '.•/%|l♦^• 


604  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

churcli  had  no  middle  age,  so  it  has  had  no  Protestant  Refor- 
mation. 

The  prevailing  philosophy  of  the  fathers  was  the  Platonic, 
so  far  as  it  was  compatible  with  the  Christian  spirit.  The 
speculative  theologians  of  the  East,  especially  those  of  the 
school  of  Origen,  and  in  the  "West,  Ambrose  and  pre-eminently 
Augustine,  were  moulded  by  the  Platonic  idealism. 

A  remarkable  combination  of  Platonism  with  Christianity, 
to  the  injury  of  the  latter,  appears  in  the  system  of  mystic 
symbolism  in  the. pseudo-Dionysia^  books,  55thwn^cannot  have 
been  composed  before  the  fifth  century,  though  they  were 
falsely  ascribed  to  the  Areopagite  of  the  book  of  Acts  (xvii. 
34),  and  proceeded  from  the  later  school  of  ^ew-Platonism,  as 
V  represented  by  Proclus  of  Athens  (f  4:85).fThe  fundamental 
i^ea  of  these  Dionysian  writings  ^n  the  celestial  hierarchy ;  "N 
/  on  the   ecclesiastical  hierarchy ;   jdn  the  divine  names ;   ij^n   ' 

C    mystic  theology ;    together  with  ten  letters)  is  a  double  hie- 
rarchy, one  in  heaven  and  one  on  earth,  each  consisting  of 
^  three  triads,  which  mediates  between  man  and  the  ineffable, 

transcendent,  hyper-essential  divinitj^  This  idea  is  a  remnant 
of  the  aristocratic  spirit  of  ancient  heathenism,  and  forms  the 
connecting  link  with  the  hierarchical  organization  of  the 
church,  and  explains  the  great  importance  and  poj^ularity 
which  the  pseudo-Dionysian  system  acquired,  especially  in  the 
mystic  theology  of  the  middle  ages.^ 

In  Synesius  of  Cyrene  also  the  Platonism  outweighs  the 

Christianity.     He  was  an  enthusiastic  pupil  of  Hypatia,  the 

famous  female  philosopher  at  Alexandria,  and  in  410  was  called 

/^  to  the  bishopric  of  Ptolemais,  the  capital  of  PentajDolis.    Before 

y^^^4^g<V^?^taking  orders  he  frankly  declared  that  he  could  not  forsake  his 

^ot^u  0>ie^  philosophical  opinions,  although  he  would  in  public  accommo- 

^.J^J/a!uU4^    date  himself  to  the  popular  belief.     Tlieophilus  of  Alexandria, 

'^^a^!j^*a^^^4S^^^  same  who  was  one  of  the  chief  persecutors  of  the  admirers 

(^trrt^e/t-t*^ ^^  / Comp.  Engelhardt:  Die  angeblichen  Schriften  des  Areop.  Dionysius  iibcrsctzt 

{^.  atoM^ieiU*-  •      und  erklart,  1823,  2  Parts;  Rittee:  Geschichte  der  christl.  Philosophie,  Bd.  ii.  p, 
^^^^'^tiel^^  ■       ^^^'    ^^'^'^'-    Geschichte  der  Lehre  von  der  Drciemigkeit,  ii.   207  f.,  and  his 
"^j         ,    /yf  f'  V/Geschichte  der  Kirche,  from  the  fourth  to  the  sixth  century,  p.  59  ff. ;  Jon.  Huber: 
'^T^*  ^  I  "     'Die  Pliilosophie  der  Kirchenvater,  pp.  327-341 ;  -affld  an  article  of  K.  Vogt,  in  Her- 


•*♦*« 


<^a    <*     .,^  Wi-        --^,.^. — ~ 


^ 


§   117.      DOCTRINAL   IMPOKTANCE,    ETC.  605 

of  Origen,  tlie  father  of  Christian  Platonism,  accepted  this 
doubtful  theory  of  accommodation.  Synesius  was  made 
bishop,  but  often  regretted  that  he  exchanged  his  favorite 
studies  for  the  responsible  and  onerous  duties  of  the  bishopric. 
In  his  hymns  he  fuses  the  Christian  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
■with  the  Platonic  idea  of  God,  and  the  Saviour  with  the  divine 
Helios,  whose  daily  setting  and  rising  was  to  him  a  type  of 
Christ's  descent  into  Hades  and  ascension  to  heaven.  The  desire 
of  the  soul  to  be  freed  from  the  chains  of  matter,  takes  the 
place  of  the  sorrow  for  sin  and  the  longing  after  salvation.' 

As  soon  as  theology  assumed  a  scholastic  character  and 
began  to  deal  more  in  dialectic  forms  than  in  living  ideas,  the 
philosophy  of  Ai'istotle  rose  to  favor  and  influence,  and  from 
John  Philoponus,  a.  d.  550,  throughout  the  middle  age  to  the 
Protestant  Reformation,  kept  the  lead  in  the  Catholic  church. 
It  was  the  philosophy  of  scholasticism,  while  mysticism  sym- 
pathized rather  with  the  Platonic  system. 

The  influence  of  the  two  great  philosophies  upon  theology 
was  beneficial  or  injurious,  according  as  the  principle  of  Chris- 
tianity was  the  governing  or  the  governed  factor.  Both  sys- 
tems are  theistic  (at  bottom  monotheistic),  and  favorable  to  the 
spirit  of  earnest  and  profound  speculation.  Platonism,  with 
its  ideal,  poetic  views,  stimulates,  fertilizes,  inspires  and 
elevates  the  reason  and  imagination,  but  also  easily  leads 
into  the  errors  of  gnosticism  and  the  twilight  of  mysticism. 
AristoteKanism,  with  its  sober  realism  and  sharp  logical  distinc- 
tions, is  a  good  discipline  for  the  understanding,  a  school  of 
dialectic  practice,  and  a  help  to  logical,  systematic,  methodical 
treatment,  but  may  also  induce  a  barren  formalism.  The 
truth  is,  Christianity  itself  is  the  highest  philosophy,  as  faith 
is  the  highest  reason ;  and  she  makes  successive  philosophies, 
as  well  as  the  arts  and  the  sciences,  tributary  to  herself,  on  the 
Pauline  principle  that  "  all  things  are  hers."  ^ 

^  Comp.  Clausen:  De  Synesio  pliilosopho,  Hafn.  1831;  Huber;  Philos.  der 
Kirchenviiter,  pp.  315-321 ;  Baur:  Church  Hist,  from  the  fourth  to  the  sixth  cen- 
tury, p,  52  ff.,  and  "W.  Moller  in  Herzog's  Encycl.  vol.  xv.  p.  335  ff. 

*  Concerning  the  influence  of  philosophy  on  the  church  fathers,  comp.  Ritter's 
Geschichte  der  christl.  Philosophia';  Ackermann,  and  Baur  :  Ueber  das  Christliche 

y 


i^Q.  t^.i^t'*^^  ^^-^^k 


606  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


§  118.    Sources  of  Theology.    Scrijpt'ure  and  Tradition. 

Oomp.  tlie  literature  in  vol.  1.  §  75  and  §  76.  Also :  Eusebixts  :  Hist.  Eccl. 
iii.  3 ;  vi.  25  (on  the  form  of  the  canon  in  the  Nicene  age) ;  Leandee 
VAX  Ess  (R.  0.) :  Ohrysostomus  oder  Stimmen  der  Kirchenvater  fur's 
Bibellesen.    Darmstadt,  1824. 

ViNCEXTirs  LiErNEiSrsis  (t  about  450) :  Commonitorium  pro  cathol.  fidei 
antiquitate  et  universitate  adv.  profanas  omnium  hser.  novitates; 
frequent  editions,  e.  g.  by  Baluzius  (1663  and  1684),  Gallandi,  Coster, 
Kliipfel  (with  prolegom.  and  notes),  Viennaj,  1809,  and  by  Herzog, 
Yratisl.  1839 ;  also  in  connection  with  the  Opera  Hilarii  Arelatensis, 
Eom.  1731,  and  the  Opera  Salviani,  Par.  1669,  and  in  Migne's  Patro- 
logia,  vol.  50,  p.  626  sqq. 

The  cliurcli  view  respecting  the  sources  of  Christian 
theology  and  the  rule  of  faith  and  practice  remains  as  it  was 
in  the  previous  period,  except  that  it  is  further  developed  in 
particulars.'  The  divine  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  as  opposed  to  human  writings ;  and  the  oral  tradi- 
tion or  living  faith  of  the  catholic  church  Irom  the  apostles 
down,  as  opposed  to  the  varying  opinions  of  heretical  sects — 
together  form  the  one  infallible  source  and  rule  of  faith.  Both 
are  vehicles  of  the  same  substance :  the  saving  revelation  of 
God  in  Christ ;  with  this  difference  in  form  and  office,  that 
the  church  tradition  determines  the  canon,  famishes  the  key 
to  the  true  intei'pretation  of  the  Scriptures,  and  guards  them 
against  heretical  abuse.  The  relation  of  the  two  in  the  mind 
of  the  ancient  church  may  be  illustrated  by  the  relation  be- 
tween the  supreme  law  of  a  country  (such  as  the  Roman  law, 
the  Code  Napoleon,  the  common  law  of  England,  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States)  and  the  courts  which  expound  the 
law,  and  decide  between  conflicting  interpretations.  Athana- 
sius,  for  example,  "  the  father  of  orthodoxy,"  always  bases  his 
conclusions  upon  Scripture,  and  appeals  to  the  authority  of 

im  Platonismus ;  Hcber's  Philosophie  der  Kirchenviiter  (Munich,  1859);^  Neander's 

Dogmengeschichte,  i.  p.  59  sqq. ;  Archer  Butler's  Lectures  on  Ancient  Philosophy ; 

Shedd's  History  of  Christian  Doctrine,  vol.  i.  ch.  1  (Philosophical  Influences  in  the 

___   Ancient  Church)  (  Alb.  Stockl:  Geschichte  der  Kiilos<^l«e,dofr-Mitteialters,  Maiaz*,^ 

'  '  Comp"!  vol.  i.  §  75  and  76. 


§   118.       60UECES    OF   THEOLOGY.  607 

tradition  only  in  proof  tbat  he  rightly  understands  and  ex- 
pounds the  sacred  books.  The  catholic  faith,  says  he,  is  that 
which  the  Lord  gave,  the  apostles  jpreached,  and  the  fathers 
have  preserved  /  npon  this  the  church  is  founded,  and  he 
who  departs  from  this  faith  can  no  longer  be  called  a  Chris- 
tian.' 

The  sum  of  doctrinal  tradition  was  contained  in  what  is 
called  the  Apostles'  Ckeed,  which  at  first  bore  various  forms, 
but  after  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century  assumed  the 
JRoman  form  now  commonly  used.  In  the  Greek  chm-ch  its 
place  was  supplied  after  the  year  325  by  the  Nicexe  Ceeed, 
which  more  fully  expresses  the  doctrine  of  the  deity  of  Christ. 
Neither  of  these  symbols  goes  beyond  the  substance  of  the 
teaching  of  the  apostles ;  neither  contains  any  doctrine  speci- 
fically Greek  or  Roman. 

The  old  catholic  doctrine  of  Scripture  and  tradition,  there- 
fore, nearly  as  it  approaches  the  Komau,  must  not  be  entirely 
confounded  with  it.  It  makes  the  two  identical  as  to  substance, 
while  the  Eoman  church  rests  upon  tradition  for  many  doc- 
trines and  usages,  like  the  doctrines  of  the  seven  sacraments, 
of  the  mass,  of  purgatory,  of  the  papacy,  and  of  the  immacu- 
late conception,  which  have  no  foundation  in  Scripture. 
Against  this  the  evangelical  church  protests,  and  asserts  the 
perfection  and  sufficiency  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  as  the  record 
of  divine  revelation ;  while  it  does  not  deny  the  value  of  tradi- 
tion, or  of  the  consciousness  of  the  church,  in  the  interpretation 
of  Scripture,  and  regulates  public  teaching  by  symbolical 
books.  In  the  Protestant  view  tradition  is  not  coordinate  with 
Scripture,  but  subordinate  to  it,  and  its  value  depends  on  its 
agreement  with  the  Scriptures.  The  Scriptures  alone  are  the 
norma  fidei  /  the  church  doctrine  is  only  the  norma  .doctrinm. 
Protestantism  gives  much  more  play  to  private  judgment  and 

'  Ad  Scrap.  Ep.  i.  cap.  28  (Opera,  torn.  i.  pars  ii.  p.  676) :  "l^iDjxev  .  .  .  t)}v  t^s 
o-pxhs  ■napadocFiV  Koi  5i.5acrKa\iav  Ka\  tt'lctiv  t^s  Ka'^o\iKT]S  eKK\r}(Tias  riv  6  ftiv  Kvptos 
fS tiiKfv,  01  5e  aTTocTToKot  eKr] pv^av ,  Kal  ol  irarepes  i(p  vKa^ay.  Voigt  (Die 
Lehre  des  Athanasius,  &c.  p.  13  S.)  makes  Athanasius  even  the  representative  of  the 
formal  principle  of  Protestantism,  the  supreme  authority,  sufficiency,  and  self-inter- 
preting character  of  the  Scriptures ;  while  Mohler  endeavors  to  place  him  on  the 
Roman  side.    Both  are  biassed,  and  violate  history  by  their  preconceptions. 


608  THIED  PEEIOD.   A.D.    311-590. 

free  iuvestigation  in  the  interpretatLon  of  the  Scriptures,  than 
the  Roman  or  even  the  Nicene  church/ 

I.  In  respect  to  the  Holy  Sckiptuees  : 

At  the  end  of  the  fourth  century  views  still  differed  in 
regard  to  the  extent  of  the  canon^  or  the  nuniber  of  the  books 
which  should  be  acknowledged  as  divine  and  authoritative. 

The  Jewish  canon,  or  the  Hebrew  Bible,  was  universally- 
received,  while  the  Apocrypha,  added  to  the  Greek  version  of 
the  Septuagint  were  only  in  a  general  way  accounted  as  books 
suitable  for  church  reading,"  and  thus  as  a  middle  class  between 
canonical  and  strictly  apocryphal  (pseudonymous)  writings. 
And  justly ;  for  those  books,  while  they  have  great  historical 
value,  and  fill  the  gap  between  the  Old  Testament  and  the 
New,  all  originated  after  the  cessation  of  prophecy,  and  they 
cannot  therefore  be  regarded  as  inspired,  nor  are  they  ever 
cited  by  Christ  or  the  apostles.' 

Of  the  Kew  Testament,  in  the  time  of  Eusebius,  the  four 
Gospels,  the  Acts,  thii'teen  Epistles  of  Paul,  the  first  Epistle 
of  John,  and  the  first  Epistle  of  Peter,  were  universally  rec- 
ognized as  canonical,*  while  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the 
second  and  third  Epistles  of  John,  the  second  Epistle  of  Peter, 
the  Epistle  of  James,  and  the  Epistle  of  Jude  were  by  many 
disputed  as  to  their  apostolic  origin,  and  the  book  of  Revela- 
tion was  doubted  by  reason  of  its  contents.^  This  indecision 
in  reference  to  the  Old  Testament  Apocrypha  prevailed  still 

'  On  this  point  compare  the  relevant  sections  in  the  works  on  Symbolic  and 
Polemic  Theology,  and  Schaff's  Principle  of  Protestantism,  1845. 

^  BiySAi'a  avayivoiiTKoixiva  (libri  ecclesiastici),  in  distinction  from  kclvoviko.  or 
Kavovi^6)xiva  on  the  one  hand,  and  aTriKpvcpa  on  the  other.     So  Athanasius. 

'  Heb.  xi.  35  ff.  probably  alludes,  indeed,  to  2  Mace.  vi.  ff. ;  but  between  a  his- 
torical allusion  and  a  corroborative  citation  with  the  solemn  tj  'Ypa<ph  ^(yei  there  is 
a  wide  difference. 

*  Hence  called  oixoKoyovfieva. 

^  Ilence  called  avrtXiySneva,  which,  however,  is  by  no  means  to  be  confounded 
with  a-KOKpvtpa  and  v6Sia.  There  are  no  apocrypha,  properly  speaking,  in  the  New 
Testament.  The  apocryphal  Gospels,  Acts,  and  Apocalypses  in  every  case  differ 
greatly  from  the  apostolic,  and  were  never  received  into  the  canon.  The  idea  of 
apocrypha  in  the  Old  Testament  is  innocent,  and  is  applied  to  later  Jewish  writings, 
the  origin  of  which  is  not  accurately  known,  but  the  contents  of  which  are  useful 
and  edifying. 


i 


§   lis.      SOUKCES   OF  THEOLOGY.  609 

longer  in  tlie  Eastern  cliurcb  ;  but  by  tbe  middle  of  tbe  fourtb 
century  tbe  Beven  disputed  books  of  tbe  Kew  Testament  were 
universally  acknowledged,  and  tbey  are  included  in  tbe  lists 
of  tbe  canonical  books  given  by  Atbanasius,  Gregory  Kazian- 
zen,  Ampbilocbius  of  Iconium,  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  and  Epi- 
pbanius ;  except  tbat  in  some  cases  tbe  Apocalypse  is  omitted. 

In  tbe  Western  cburcb  tbe  canon  of  botb  Testaments  was 
closed  at  tbe  end  of  tbe  fourtb  century  tbrougb  tbe  autbority 
of  Jerome  (wbo  wavered,  bowever,  between  critical  doubts 
and  tbe  principle  of  tradition),  and  more  especially  of  Augus- 
tine, wbo  firmly  followed  tbe  Alexandrian  canon  of  tbe  Sep- 
tuagint,  and  tbe  preponderant  tradition  in  reference  to  tbe 
disputed  Catbolic  Epistles  and  tbe  Revelation ;  tbougb  be 
bimself,  in  some  places,  inclines  to  consider  tbe  Old  Testament 
Apocrypba  as  deufero-canomcal  books,  bearing  a  subordinate 
autbority.  Tbe  council  of  Hippo  in  393,  and  tbe  tbird 
(accordbig  to  anotber  reckoning,  tbe  sixtb)  council  of  Cartbage 
in  397,  under  tbe  influence  of  Augustine,  wbo  attended  botb, 
fixed  tbe  catbob'c  canon  of  tbe  Holy  Scriptures,  including  tbe 
Apocr}3)ba  of  tbe  Old  Testament,  and  probibited  tbe  reading 
of  otber  books  in  tbe  cbui'cbes,  excepting  tbe  Acts  of  tbe  Mar- 
tyrs on  tbeir  memorial  days.  Tbese  two  African  councils, 
witb  Augustine,'  give  forty-four  books  as  tbe  canonical  books 
of  tbe  Old  Testament,  in  tbe  following  order :  Genesis,  Exodus, 
Leviticus,  lumbers,  Deuteronomy,  Josbua,  Judges,  Eutb, 
four  books  of  Kings  (tbe  two  of  Samuel  and  tbe  two  of  Kings), 
two  books  of  Paralipomena  (Cbronicles),  Job,  tbe  Psalms,  five 
books  of  Solomon,  tbe  twelve  minor  Propbets,  Isaiab,  Jere- 
miab,  Daniel,  Ezekiel,  Tobias,  Juditb,  Estber,  two  books  of 
Ezra,  two  books  of  Maccabees.  Tbe  New  Testament  canon  is 
tbe  same  as  ours. 

Tbis  decision  of  tbe  transmarine  cburcb,  bowever,  was  sub- 
ject to  ratification  ;  and  tbe  concurrence  of  tbe  Koman  see  it 
received  wben  Innocent  I.  and  Gelasius  I.  (a.  d.  414)  repeated 
tbe  same  index  of  biblical  books. 

Tbis  canon  remained  undisturbed  till  tbe  sixteentb  century, 

'  De  doctr.  Christ.  1.  ii.  c.  8. 
VOL.  n. — 39 


610  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

and  was  sanctioned  by  the  council  of  Trent  at  its  fonrtli  ses- 
sion. 

Protestantism  retained  the  'New  Testament  canon  of  the 
Roman  ehnrch/  bnt,  in  accordance  with  the  orthodox  Jewish 
and  the  primitive  Christian  view,  exchided  the  Apocrypha 
from  the  Old.^ 

The  most  eminent  of  the  church  fathers  speak  in  the 
strongest  terms  of  tlie  full  inspiration  and  the  infallible 
authority  of  the  holy  Scriptures,  and  commend  the  diligent 
reading  of  them  even  to  the  laity.  Especially  Chrysostom. 
The  want  of  general  education,  however,  and  the  enormous 
cost  of  books,  left  the  people  for  the  most  part  dependent  on 
the  mere  hearing  of  the  word  of  God  in  public  worship  ;  and 
the  free  private  study  of  the  Bible  was  repressed  by  the  pre- 
vailing spirit  of  the  hierarchy.  No  prohibition,  indeed,  was 
yet  laid  upon  the  reading  of  the  Bible ;  but  the  presumj^tion 
that  it  was  a  book  of  the  priests  and  monks  already  existed. 
It  remained  for  a  much  later  period,  by  the  invention  of  print- 
ing, the  free  spirit  of  Protestantism,  and  the  introduction  of 
popular  schools,  to  make  the  Bible  properly  a  people's  book, 
as  it  was  originally  designed  to  be ;  and  to  disseminate  it  by 
'  Bible  societies,  which  now  print  and  circulate  more  copies  of 
it  in  one  year,  than  were  i;nade  in  the  whole  middle  age,  or 
even  in  the  fifteen  centuries  before  the  Eeformation. 

The  oldest  manuscrijots  of  the  Bible  now  extant  date  no 
further  back  than  the  fourth  centmy,  are  very  few,  and  abound 
in  unessential  errors  and  omissions  of  every  kind ;    and  the 

'  The  well-known  doubts  of  Luther  respecting  some  of  the  antilegomena,  espe- 
cially the  Epistle  of  James,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  the  Revelation,  are 
mere  private  opinions,  which  have  latterly  been  re-asserted  by  individual  Lutheran 
divines,  like  Philippi  and  Kahnis,  but  have  had  no  influence  upon  the  church  doctrine. 

^  The  more  particular  history  of  the  canon  belongs  to  historical  and  critical 
Introduction  to  the  Bible.  Besides  the  relevant  sections  in  works  of  this  sort,  and 
in  Lardner's  Credibihty  of  the  Gospel  History,  and  Kirchhofer's  Quellensamm- 
lung  (1844),  comp.  the  following  special  treatises:  Thiersch:  Herstellung  des 
historischen  Standpunkts  fiir  die  Kritik  der  N.  T'tUchen  Schrifteu,  1845  ;  Ckedner: 
Zur  Geschichte  des  Kanous,  184*7;  Oeuler:  Kanon  des  A.  Ts.  in  Herzog's  Ency- 
klopitdie,  vol.  vii.  pp.  243-270 ;  Landerer  :  Kanon  des  Ncuen  Testaments,  ibid.  pp. 
270-303 ;  also  an  extended  article :  Canon  of  Scripture,  in  W.  Smith's  Dictionary 
•f  the  Bible  (London  and  Boston,  1860),  vol.  i.  pp.  250-268. 


i 


i 


-       §   118.       SOURCES   OF   THEOLOGY.  611 

problem  of  a  critical  restoration  of  tlie  original  text  is  not  yet 
satisfactorily  solved,  nor  can  it  be  more  than  approximately 
solved  in  the  absence  of  the  original  -writings  of  the  apostles. 

The  oldest  and  most  important  mamiscripts  in  imcial  let- 
ters are  the  Sinaitic  (first  discovered  by  Tisehendorf  in  1859, 
and  published  in  1862),  the  Vatican  (in  Eome,  defective),  the 
Alexandrian  (in  London) ;  then  the  much  mutilated  codex  of 
Ephraim  Syrus  in  Paris,  and  the  incomplete  codex  of  Cam- 
bridge. From  these  and  a  few  other  uncial  codices  the  okl?st 
attainable  text  must  be  mainly  gathered.  Secondary  source>3 
are  quotations  in  the  fathers,  the  earliest  versions,  such  as  the 
Syriac  Peshito  and  the  Latin  Yulgate,  and  the  later  manuscripts.* 

The  faith  which  rests  not  upon  the  letter,  but  upon  the 
living  spirit  of  Christianity,  is  led  into  no  error  by  the  defects 
of  the  manuscripts  and  ancient  and  modern  versions  of  the 
Bible,  but  only  excited  to  new  and  deeper  study. 

The  spread  of  the  church  among  all  the  nations  of  the 
Roman  empire,  and  even  among  the  barbarians  on  its  borders, 
brought  with  it  the  necessity  of  translating  the  Scriptures  into 
various  tongues.  The  most  important  of  these  versions,  and 
the  one  most  used,  is  the  Latin  Vitlgate,  which  was  made  by 
the  learned  Jerome  on  the  basis  of  the  older  Itala,  and  which 
afterwards,  notwithstanding  its  many  errors,  was  placed  by 
the  Poman  church  on  a  level  with  the  original  itself.  The 
knowledge  of  Hebrew  among  the  fathers  was  very  rare ;  the 
Septuagint  was  considered  sufficient,  and  even  the  knowledge 
of  Greek  diminished  steadily  in  the  Latin  church  after  the 
invasion  of  the  barbarians  and  the  schism  with  the  East,  so 
that  the  Bible  in  its  original  languages  became  a  sealed  book, 
and  remained  such  until  the  revival  of  learning  in  the  fifteenth 
century. 

In  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  the  system  of 
allegorical  exposition  and  imposition  was  in  high  repute,  and 

'  Full  information  on  this  subject  may  be  found  in  the  Introductions  to  the  Xew 
Testament,  and  in  the  Prolegomena  of  the  critical  editions  of  the  Ne^v  Testament, 
among  which  the  editions  of  Lachmann,  Tisehendorf,  Tregelles,  and  Alford  are  the 
most  important.  Comp.  particularly  the  eighth  large  edition  of  Tisehendorf,  begun 
in  18G5,  and  diligently  employing  all  existing  critical  helps. 


612  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D,    311-590. 

often  degenerated  into  tlie  most  arbitrary  conceits,  especially 
in  the  Alexandrian  scliool,  to  wliicli  most  of  tlie  great  dogmat- 
ic theologians  of  the  Kicene  age  belonged.  In  opposition  to 
this  system  the  Antiochian  school,  founded  by  Lucian  (f  311), 
and  represented  by  Diodorns  of  Tarsus,  Theodore  of  Mopsues- 
tia,  and  best  by  John  Chrysostom  and  Theodoret,  advocated  a 
soberer  grammatical  and  historical  exegesis,  and  made  a 
sharper  distinction  between  the  human  and  the  divine  elements 
in  the  Scriptures.  Theodore  thereby  incurred  the  suspicion 
and  subsequently  even  the  condemnation  of  the  Greek 
chm'ch. 

Among  the  Latin  fathers  a  similar  difference  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  Scripture  appears  between  the  discerning  depth 
and  lively  play  of  Augustine  and  the  grammatical  and  archse- 
ological  scholarship  and  dogmatical  superficiality  of  Jerome. 

II.  Tlie  Holy  Scriptures  were  universally  accepted  as  the 
SLipreme  authority  and  infallil^le  rule  of  faith.  But  as  the 
Scriptures  themselves  were  variously  interpreted,  and  were 
claimed  by  the  heretics  for  their  views,  the  fathers  of  our 
period,  like  L'enseus  and  TertuUian  before  them,  had  recourse 
at  the  same  time  to  teadition,  as  preserved  from  the  apostles 
through  the  unbroken  succession  of  the  bishops.  With  them 
the  Scriptures  are  the  suj)reme  law;  the  combined  wisdom 
and  piety  of  the  catholic  church,  the  organic  body  of  the  faith- 
ful, is  the  judge  w^liich  decides  the  true  sense  of  the  law.  For 
to  be  understood  the  Bible  must  be  explained,  either  by  pri- 
vate judgment  or  by  the  universal  faith  of  Christendom. 

Strictly  speaking,  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  is  the  author,  is  also 
the  only  uifallible  interpreter  of  the  Scriptures.  But  it  was 
held  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  given  only  to  the  orthodox  church, 
not  to  heretical  and  scliismatic  sects,  and  that  he  expresses 
himself  through  assembled  orthodox  bishops  and  universal 
councils  in  the  clearest  and  most  authoritative  way.  "The 
heretics,"  says  Hilary,  "  all  cite  the  Scriptures,  but  without 
the  sense  of  the  Scriptures;  for  those  who  are  outside  the 
church  can  have  no  understanding  of  the  word  of  God." 
They  imagine  they  follow  the  Scriptures,  while  in  truth  they 


I 


§    118.      SOUECES   OF   THEOLOGY.  613 

follow  their  own  conceits,  wliicli  they  put  into  the  Scriptures 
instead  of  drawing  their  thoughts  from  them. 

Even  Augustine,  who  of  all  the  fathers  stands  nearest  to 
evangelical  Protestantism,  on  this  point  advocates  the  catholic 
principle  in  the  celebrated  maxim  which  he  urges  against  the 
Manichaeans :  "  I  would  not  believe  the  gospel,  if  I  were  not 
compelled  by  the  authority  of  the  universal  church."  But  he 
immediately  adds :  "  God  forbid  that  I  should  not  believe  the 
gospel." ' 

But  there  are  different  traditions ;  not  to  speak  of  various 
interpretations  of  the  catholic  tradition.  Hence  the  need  of  a 
criterion  of  true  and  false  tradition.  The  semi-Pelagian  divine, 
VmcENTius,  a  monk  and  priest  in  the  South-Gallic  cloister  of 
Liriniun  (f450),"  otherwise  little  known,  propounded  the 
maxim  which  formed  an  epoch  in  this  matter,  and  has  since 
remained  the  standard  in  the  Roman  church :  We  must  hold 
"  what  has  been  everywhere^  always^  and  hy  all  believed."  ^ 

'  "Ego  vero  evangelio  non  crederem,  nisi  me  Catholicie  ecclesiae  commoveret 
autoritas.  .  .  .  Sed  absit  ut  ego  Evangelio  non  credam.  Illi  enim  credens, 
non  invenio  quomodo  possim  etiam  tibi  [ManichsBus]  credere.  Apostolorum  enim 
nomina,  quae  ibi  leguntur,  non  inter  se  continent  nomen  Manichasi."  Contra  Epist. 
Manichsei,  quam  vocant  fundamenti,  cap.  6  (ed.  Bened.  torn.  viii.  p.  154).  His 
object  Lq  this  argument  is  to  show  that  the  Manichseans  have  no  right  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, that  the  Cathohc  church  is  the  legitimate  owner  and  interpreter  of  the  Bible. 
But  it  is  an  abuse  to  press  this  argument  at  once  into  the  service  of  Rome  as  is  so 
often  done.  Between  the  controversy  of  the  old  Cathohc  church  with  Manichaeism, 
and  the  controversy  of  Romanism  with  Protestantism,  there  is  an  immense  diifer- 
ence. 

'  Lerinum  or  Lirinum  (now  St.  Honorat)  is  one  of  the  group  of  small  islands 
in  the  Mediterranean  which  formerly  belonged  to  Roman  Gaul,  afterwards  to  France. 
In  the  fifth  century  it  was  a  seminary  of  learned  monks  and  priests  for  France,  as 
Faustus  Regiensis,  Hilarius  Arelotensis,  Salvianus,  and  others. 

''  Commonit.  cap.  2  (in  Migxe's  Patrolog.  vol.  50,  p.  640) :  "  In  ipsa  item  Catho- 
lica  Ecclesia  magnopere  curandum  est,  ut  id  teneamus  quod  uhique,  quod  semper, 
quod  ab  omnibus  creditum  est."  The  Commonitorium  was  composed,  as  we  learn 
from  the  preface  and  from  ch.  42,  about  three  years  after  the  ecumenical  council 
of  Ephesus,  therefore  about  434,  under  the  false  name  of  Peregrinus,  as  a  help  to 
the  memory  of  the  author  that  he  might  have  the  main  poiuts  of  ecclesiastical  tradi- 
tion constantly  at  hand  against  the  heretics.  Baronius  calls  it  "  opua  certe  aureum," 
and  Bellarmin  "  parvum  mole  et  virtute  maximum."  It  consisted  originally  of  two 
books,  but  the  manuscript  of  the  second  book  was  stolen  from  the  author,  who  then 
added  a  brief  summary  of  both  books  at  the  close  of  the  first  (c.  41-43).     Vossius, 


614  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Here  we  have  a  threefold  test  of  the  ecclesiastical  ortho- 
doxy :  Catholicity  of  place,  of  time,  and  of  number ;  or  ubiqui- 
ty, antiquity,  and  universal  consent ; '  in  other  words,  an 
article  of  faith  must  be  traced  up  to  the  apostles,  and  be  found 
in  all  Christian  countries,  and  among  all  believers.  But  this 
principle  can  be  applied  only  to  a  few  fundamental  articles  of 
revealed  religion,  not  to  any  of  the  specifically  Romish  dogmas, 
and,  to  have  any  reasonable  meaning,  must  be  reduced  to  a  mere 
principle  of  majority.  In  regard  to  the  consensus  omnium^ 
which  properly  includes  both  the  others,  Yincentius  himself 
makes  tliis  limitation,  by  defining  the  condition  as  a  concur- 
rence of  the  majority  of  the  clergy.''  To  the  voice  of  the 
people  neither  he  nor  the  whole  Roman  system,  in  matters  of 
faith,  pays  the  slightest  regard.  In  many  important  doctrines, 
however,  there  is  not  even  a  consensus  patrum,  as  in  the  doc- 
trine of  free  will,  of  predestination,  of  the  atonement.  A  cer- 
tain freedom  of  divergent  private  opinions  is  the  indispensable 
condition  of  all  progress  of  thought,  and  precedes  the  eccle- 
siastical settlement  of  every  article  of  faith.  Even  Yincentius 
expressly  asserts  a  steady  advance  of  the  church  in  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  truth,  though  of  course  in  harmony  with  the  pre- 
vious steps,  as  a  man  or  a  tree  remains  identical  through  the 
various  stages  of  growth.' 

Yincentius  is  thoroughly  Catholic  in  the  spirit  and  ten- 
dency of  his  work,  and  has  not  the  most  remote  conception  of 

Cardinal  Norisius  (Historia  Pelagiana,  1.  ii.  c.  11),  Natalis  Alexander,  Hefele,  and 
Schmidt  give  this  work  a  polemic  aim  against  strict  Augustinism,  for  which  certainly 
the  Greek  church  cannot  be  claimed,  so  that  the  three  criteria  of  catholicity  are 
wanting.  There  is  pretty  strong  evidence  in  the  book  itself  that  Yincentius  belonged 
to  the  semi-Pelagian  school  which  arose  in  Marseille  and  Lirinum.  He  was  prob- 
ably also  the  author  of  the  Vincentiance  objediones  against  Augustine's  doctrine  of 
predestination.  Comp.  on  Yincentius,  Tillemont's  Mumoires,  torn.  xv.  pp.  143-147 ; 
the  art.  Vincentiux  v.  L.  by  H.  Schmidt  in  Herzog's  Encykl.  vol.  xvii.  pp.  211-21*7; 
and  an  essay  of  C.  J.  Hefele  (R.  C),  in  his  Beitrage  zur  Kirchengeschichte,  Archiio- 
logie  und  Liturgik,  vol.  i.  p.  146  ff.  (Tiib.  1864). 

'  As  Yincentius  expresses  himself  in  the  succeeding  sentence :  Universitas, 
antiquitas,  consensio.     Comp.  c.  27. 

"^  "  Consensio  omnium  vcl  certe  jioenc  omnium  saoerdotum  pariter  et  magistro- 
rum,"  etc.     Common,  c.  2  (in  Migne,  p.  640). 

''  Cap  23  (in  Migne,  vol  50,  p.  667  sqq.). 


§    118.       SOURCES   OF   THEOLOGY.  615 

the  free  Protestant  study  of  the  Scriptures.  But  on  the  other 
hand  he  would  have  as  little  toleration  for  new  dogmas.  He 
wished  to  make  tradition  not  an  independent  source  of  knowl- 
edge and  rule  of  faith  by  the  side  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  but 
only  to  have  it  acknowledged  as  the  true  interpreter  of  Scrij)- 
ture,  and  as  a  bar  to  heretical  abuse.  The  criterion  of  the 
antiquity  of  a  doctrine,  which  he  required,  involves  apostolici- 
ty,  hence  agreement  with  the  spirit  and  substance  of  the  New 
Testament.  The  church,  says  he,  as  the  solicitous  guardian 
of  that  which  is  intrusted  to  her,  changes,  diminishes,  increases 
nothing.  Her  sole  effort  is  to  shape,  or  confirm,  or  preserve 
the  old.  Innovation  is  the  business  of  heretics,  not  of  orthodox 
believers.  The  canon  of  Scripture  is  complete  in  itself,  and 
more  than  sufiicient.^  But  since  all  heretics  appeal  to  it,  the 
authority  of  the  church  must  be  called  in  as  the  rule  of  inter- 
pretation, and  in  this  we  must  follow  universality,  antiquity, 
and  consent.'  It  ;s  the  custom  of  the  Catholics,  says  he  in  the 
same  work,  to  prove  the  true  faith  in  two  ways :  first  by  the 
authority  of  the  holy  Scriptures,  then  by  the  tradition  of  the 
Catholic  church ;  not  because  the  canon  alone  is  not  of  itself 
sufficient  for  all  things,  but  on  account  of  the  many  conflicting 
interpretations  and  perversions  of  the  Scriptures.^ 

In  the  same  spirit  says  pope  Leo  I. :  "  It  is  not  permitted 
to  depart  even  in  one  word  from  the  doctrine  of  the  Evange- 
lists and  the  Apostles,  nor  to  think  otherwise  concerning  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  than  the  blessed  apostles  and  our  fathers 
learned  and  taught."  * 

'  Cap.  2 ;  "  Quum  sit  ptrfectus  Scripturarum  Canon  et  sibi  ad  omnia  sails 
superque  svfficiat"  etc.     Cap.  29. 

*  "  Hoc  facere  curabant  .  .  .  ut  divinum  canonem  secundum  universalis  ecclesiae 
traditiones  et  juxta  catholici  dogmatis  regulas  interpretentur,  in  qua  item  catholica 
et  apostolica  ecclesia  sequantur  necesse  est  universitatem,  antiquitatem,  consen- 
sionem."     Commonit.  cap.  2*7  (in  Migne,  vol.  50,  p.  6Y4).     Comp.  c.  2-4. 

^  Cap.  29  (in  Migne,  vol.  50,  p.  67*7):  "Non  quia  canon  solus  non  sibi  ad  uni- 
versa  sufficiat,  sed  quia  verba  divina,  pro  suo  plerique  arbitratu  interpretantes, 
varias  opiniones  erroresque  concipiant,"  etc. 

*  Epist.  82  ad  Eplsc.  Marcianum  Aug.  (Opera,  torn.  i.  p.  1044,  ed.  Ballerini,  and 
in  Migne,  liv.  p.  918):  "Quum  ab  evangelica  apostolicaque  doctrina  ne  uno  quidem 
verbo  liceat  dissidere,  aut  aliter  de  Soripturis  divinis  sapere  quam  beati  apostoli  et 
patres  nostri  didicerunt  atque  docuerunt,"  etc. 


616  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

The  catholic  principle  of  tradition  became  more  and  more 
confirmed,  as  the  authority  of  the  fathers  and  councils  in- 
creased and  the  learned  study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  declined ; 
and  tradition  gradually  set  itself  in  practice  on  a  level  with 
Scripture,  and  even  above  it.  It  fettered  free  investigation, 
and  promoted  a  rigid,  stationary  and  intolerant  orthodoxy, 
which  condemned  men  like  Origen  and  TertuUian  as  heretics. 
But  on  the  other  hand  the  principle  of  tradition  unquestionably 
exerted  a  wholesome  conservative  power,  and  saved  the  sub- 
stance of  the  ancient  church  doctrine  from  the  obscuring  and 
confusing  influence  of  the  pagan  barbarism  which  deluged 
Christendom. 

I. — Teinitaeian  Conteoveksies. 

GENERAL  LITERATURE  OF   THE  ARIAN  CONTROVERSIES. 

I.  SoTTRCEs :  On  the  ortliodox  side  most  of  the  fathers  of  the  fourth  century ; 

especially  the  dogmatic  and  polemic  works  of  Athanasius  (Orationes 
c.  Arianos ;  De  decretis  Nicasnee  Synodi ;  De  sententia  Dionysii ;  Apo- 
logia c.  Arianos;  Apologia  de  fuga  sua;  Historia  Arianorum,  etc., 
aU  in  torn.  i.  pars  i.  ii.  of  the  Bened.  ed.),  Basil  (Adv.  Eunomium), 
Gregory  Nazianzek  (Orationes  theologicse),  Gregoey  of  Nyssa 
(Contra  Eunom.),  Epiphanius  (Ancoratus),  Hilary  (De  Trinitate), 
Ambrose  (De  Fide),  Augustixe  (De  Trinitate,  and  Contra  Maximini- 
mnm  Arianum),  Rtjfiitus,  and  the  Greek  church  historians. 

On  the  heretical  side:  The  fragments  of  the  writings  of  Arius 
(OiiXeia,  and  two  Epistol^  to  Eusehius  of  Nicomedia  and  Alexander 
of  Alexandria),  preserved  in  quotations  in  Athanasius,  Epiphanius, 
Socrates,  and  Theodoret;  comp.  Fabricius :  Bihlioth.  gr.  viii.  p.  309. 
Fragmenta  Aeiaxorum  about  388  in  Angela  Mai:  Scriptorum  veterum 
nova  collect.  Rom.  1828,  vol.  iii.  The  fragments  of  the  Church  His- 
tory of  the  Arian  Philostorgius,  a.  d.  350-425. 

II.  "Works  :  Tillemont  (R.  C.)  :  Memoires,  etc.  torn.  vi.  pp.  239-825,  ed. 

Paris,  1699,  and  ed.  Ven.  (the  external  history  chiefly).  Dionysixts 
PsTAvirs  (Jesuit,  tl652):  De  theologicis  dogmatibus,  torn,  ii.,  which 
treats  of  the  divine  Trinity  in  eight  books ;  and  in  part  torn.  iv.  and  v. 
which  treat  in  sixteen  books  of  the  Incarnation  of  the  Word.  This  is 
still,  though  incomplete,  the  most  learned  work  of  the  Roman  church 
in  the  History  of  Doctrines ;  it  first  appeared  at  Paris,  1644-'50,  in  five 
volumes  fol.,  then  at  Amsterdam,  1700  (in  6  vols.),  and  at  Venice, 
1757  (ed.  Zacharia),  and  has  been  last  edited  by  Passaglia  and  Schra- 
der  in  Rome,  1857.     J.  M.  Travasa  (R.  C.)  :  Storia  critica  della  vita 


GENERAL   LITERATURE   OF    THE   ARIAN   CONTROVERSIES.      617 

di  Ario.  Yen.  1746.  S.  J.  Maimbueg:  Histoire  de  TAriaiiisme. 
Par.  1675.  John  Peaeson  (bishop  of  Chester,  tl686):  An  Exposi- 
tion of  the  Creed  (in  the  second  article),  1689,  12th  ed.  Lond.  1741, 
and  very  often  edited  since  by  Dobson,  Burton,  Nichols,  Chevalier, 
etc.  George  Bull  (Anglican  bishop  of  St.  David's,  1 1710) :  Defensio 
fidei  Nicajnco.  Ox.  1685  (0pp.  Lat.  fol.  ed.  Grabe,  Loud.  1703.  Com- 
plete Works,  ed.  Burton,  Oxf.  1827,  and  again  in  1846,  vol.  5th  in  two 
parts,  and  in  English  in  the  Auglo-Catholic  Library,  1851).  This 
classical  work  endeavors,  with  great  learning,  to  exhibit  the  ISTicene 
faith  in  all  the  ante-'NicQne  fathers,  and  so  belongs  more  properly  to 
the  previous  period.  Dan.  Wateelaxd  (archdeacon  of  Middlesex, 
1 1730,  next  to  Bull  the  ablest  Anglican  defender  of  the  Ficene  faith) : 
Vindication  of  Christ's  Divinity,  1719  ff.,  in  Waterland's  "Works,  ed. 
Mildert,  vols.  i.  ii.  iii.  Oxf.  1843.  (Several  acute  and  learned  essays 
and  sermons  in  defence  of  the  orthodox  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  against 
the  high  Arianism  of  Dr.  Sam.  Clarke  and  Dr.  Whitby.)  Che.  W.  F. 
Walch:  Vollstandige  Historic  der  Ketzereien,  etc.  11  vols.  Leipzig, 
1762  fF.  Vols.  ii.  and  iii.  (exceedingly  thorough  and  exceedingly  dry). 
Gibbon  :  History  of  the  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Eomanr  Empire,  ch. 
xxi.  A.  MoHLER  (R.  C.)  :  Athanasius  der  Grosse  u.  die  Kirche  seiner 
Zeit.  Mainz  (1827)  ;  2d  ed.  1844  (Bk  ii.-vi.).  J.  H.  Newjian  (at  the 
time  the  learned  head  of  Fuseyism,  afterwards  E.  C.) :  The  Arians  of 
the  Fourth  Century.  Lond.  1838 ;  2d  ed.  (unchanged),  1854.  F.  Che. 
Back  :  Die  christl.  Lehre  von  der  Dreieinigkeit  u.  Menschwerdung  in 
ihrer  geschichtl.  Entwicklung.  3  vols.  Tubingen,  1841-'43.  Vol.  i. 
pp.  306-825  (to  the  council  of  Chalcedon),  Comp.  also  Baur's  Kir- 
chengesch.  vom  4ten  bis  6ten  Jahrh.  Ttib.  1859,  pp.  79-123.  Js.  A. 
Doener:  Entwicklungsgesch.  der  Lehre  von  der  Person  Christi. 
1836,  2d  ed.  in  2  vols.  Stuttg.  1845-'53.  Vol.  i.  pp.  773-1080  (English 
transl.  by  W.  L.  Alexander  and  D.  W.  Simon,  in  Clark's  Foreign 
Theol.  Library,  Edinb.  1861).  R.  'WrLBERFOEOE  (at  the  time  arch- 
deacon of  East  Riding,  afterwards  R.  C.) :  The  Doctrine  of  the  Licar- 
nation  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  4th  ed.  Lond.  1852.  Bishop  Kate: 
Athanasius  and  the  council  of  Nicsaa.  Lond.  1853.  C.  Jos.  Hefele 
(R.  C):  ConciUengeschichte.  Freib.  1855  ff.  Vol.  i.  p.  219  ff.  Al- 
BEET  Prince  de  Broglie  (R.  C.) :    L'eglise  et  I'empire  romain,  an 

ii.  1     ^^ 
sqq.  "W.  W.  Haevey  :  History  and  Theology  of  the  Three  Creeds.    Lond*--^^!- 


rv;.  siecle.  Paris,  1856-'66,  6  vols.  Vol.  i.  p.  331  sqq. ;  vol.  ii.  1 
sqq.  "W.  W.  Haevey  :  History  and  Theology  of  the  Three  Creeds.  Lond- 
1856,  2  vols.  H.  VoiGT :  Die  Lehre  des  Athanasius  von  Alexajjdfien. 
Bremen,  1861.  \  A.  P.  Stanley :'  Lectures  on  the  History  of^uie  East-  y^ 


V  of^lhe  East-  y^ 

|ects.  ^•-^^•tdf^"/^' 

ections  in  th^V-^/lmfiiCiSt 


ern  Church.     2d  ed.  1862  (reprinted  in  New  York). 

i'^'MT,  hriT^fi^^  ^'^■'•■"  ""^^'i')      Comp.  also  the  relevant  sections  in  thd^^'»rlL^*fc»#y; 
general  Church  Histories  of  Fletjet,  Scheockh  (vols.  v.   and  vi.),  ^    ^Sl 
ISTeandee,  Gleseleb,  and  in  the  Doctrine  Histories   of  Ml-nscher-  ^\  ' Mj^^'Ari, 


Colln,  Batjmgaeten-Cettsitts,  Hagenbach,  Batie,  Beoe:,  Shedd. 


/ 


618  THEED  PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


§  119.     Hie  Aricm  Controversy  down  to  the  Council  ofNicwa, 

318-325. 

The  Arian  controversy  relates  primarily  to  the  deity  of 
Christ,  but  in  its  course  it  touches  also  the  deity  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  embraces  therefore  the  whole  mystery  of  the  Holy 
Trinity  and  the  incarnation  of  God,  which  is  the  very  centre 
of  the  Christian  revelation.  The  dogma  of  the  Trinity  came 
up  not  by  itself  in  abstract  form,  but  in  inseparable  connection 
with  the  doctrine  of  the  deity  of  Christ  and  the  Holy  Ghost. 
If  this  latter  doctrine  is  true,  the  Trinity  follows  by  logical 
necessity,  the  biblical  monotheism  being  presumed ;  in  other 
words :  If  God  is  one,  and  if  Ckrist  and  the  Holy  Ghost  are 
distinct  from  the  Father  and  yet  participate  in  the  divine  sub- 
stance, God  must  be  triune.  Though  there  are  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures  themselves  few  texts  which  directly  prove  the 
Trinity,  and  the  name  Trinity  is  wholly  wanting  in  them,  this 
doctrine  is  taught  with  all  the  greater  force  in  a  living  form 
from  Genesis  to  Revelation  by  the  main  facts  of  the  revelation 
of  God  as  Creator,  Redeemer,  and  Sanctifier,  besides  being  in- 
directly involved  in  the  deity  of  Christ  and  the  Holy  Ghost. 

The  church  always  believed  in  this  Trinity  of  revelation, 
and  confessed  its  faith  by  baptism  into  the  name  of  the  Father, 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  This  carried  with  it 
fi'om  the  first  the  conviction,  that  this  revelation  of  God  must 
be  grounded  in  a  distinction  immanent  in  the  divine  essence. 
But  to  bring  this  faith  into  clear  and  fixed  knowledge,  and  to 
form  the  baptismal  confession  into  doctrme,  was  the  hard  and 
earnest  intellectual  work  of  three  centuries.  Li  the  Nicene 
age  minds  c^^ashed  against  each  other,  and  fought  the  decisive 
battles  for  and  against  the  doctrines  of  the  true  deity  of  Christ, 
with  which  the  divinity  of  Christianity  stands  or  falls. 

The  controversies  on  this  fundamental  question  agitated 
the  Roman  empire  and  the  church  of  East  and  West  for  more 
*  '  than  half  a  century,  and  gave  occasion  to  the  first  two  ecume- 
nical.councils  of  Nicsea  and  Constantinople.  At  last  the  ortho- 
dox doctrine  triumphed,  and  in  381  was  brought  into  the  form 


M 


§   119.      TflE   AEIAN   CONTKOVERST.  619 

in  -wliicli  it  is  to  tliis  day  substantially  held  in  all  ortliodox 
cliurclies. 

The  external  history  of  the  Arian  controversy,  of  which  we 
first  sketch  the  main  features,  falls  into  three  stages : 

1.  From  the  outbreak  of  the  controversy  to  the  temporary 
victory  of  orthodoxy  at  the  council  of  J^icsea;  a.  d.  318-325. 

2.  The  Arian  and  semi-Arian  reaction,  and  its  prevalence 
to  the  death  of  Constantius ;  A.  d.  325-361. 

3.  The  final  victory,  and  the  completion  of  the  Nicene 
creed ;  to  the  council  of  Constantinople,  a.  d.  381. 

Arianism  proceeded  from  tlie  bosom  of  the  Catholic  cliurch, 
was  condemned  as  heresy  at  the  council  of  Nicsea,  but  afterwards 
under  various  forms  attained  even  ascendency  for  a  time  in  the 
church,  until  at  the  second  ecumenical  council  it  was  cast  out 
forever.  From  that  time  it  lost  its  importance  as  a  politico- 
theological  power,  but  continued  as  an  uncatholic  sect  more 
than  two  hundred  years  among  the  Germanic  nations,  which 
were  converted  to  Christianity  under  the  Arian  domination. 

The  roots  of  the  Arian  controversy  are  to  be  found  partly 
in  the  contradictory  elements  of  the  christology  of  the  great 
Origen,  which  reflect  the  crude  condition  of  the  Christian 
mind  in  the  third  century  ;  partly  in  the  antagonism  between 
the  Alexandrian  and  the  Antiocliian  theology.  Origen,  on 
the  one  hand,  attributed  to  Christ  eternity  and  other  divine 
attributes  which  logically  lead  to  the  orthodox  doctrine  of  the 
identity  of  substance ;  so  that  he  was  vindicated  even  by  Atha- 
nasius,  the  two  Cappadocian  Gregories,  and  Basil.  But,  on 
the  other  hand,  in  his  zeal  for  the  personal  distinctions  in  the 
Godhead,  he  taught  with  equal  clearness  a  separateness  of 
essence  between  the  Father  and  the  Son,^  and  the  subordina- 
tion of  the  Son,  as  a  second  or  secondary  God  beneath  the 
Father,^  and  thus  furnished   a  starting  point  for  the   Arian 

'  'ETepSTTts  rris  ovalas,  or  toD  vwoKiip.ivov.     De  orat.  c.  15. 

°  Hence  he  termed  the  Logos  livrtpos  0e(5$,  or  0€o'j  (without  the  article,  comp. 
John  i.  1),  in  distinction  from  the  Father,  who  is  absolute  God,  6  0eos,  or  avToSnos, 
Deus  per  se.  He  calls  the  Father  also  the  root  {piC°)  ^^^  fountain  (7777777)  of  the 
whole  Godhead.  Comp.  vol.  i.  §78.  Redepenning:  Origenes,  ii.  304  sq.,  and 
Thomasius :  Origenes,  p.  1 1 8  sq. 


620  THIED  PEEIOD,   A.D.    311-590. 

heresy.  The  eternal  generation  of  the  Son  from  the  will  of  the 
Father  was,  with  Origen,  the  communication  of  a  divine  but 
secondary  substance,  and  this  idea,  in  the  hands  of  the  less 
devout  and  profound  Arius,  who  with  his  more  rigid  logic 
could  admit  no  intermediate  being  between  God  and  the  crea- 
ture, deteriorated  to  the  notion  of  the  primal  creature. 

But  in  general  Arianism  was  much  more  aldn  to  the  spirit 
of  the  Antiochian  school  than  to  that  of  the  Alexandrian. 
Ai'ius  himself  traced  his  doctrine  to  Lucian  of  Antioch,  who 
advocated  the  heretical  views  of  Paul  of  Samosata  on  the 
Trinity,  and  was  for  a  time  excommunicated,  but  afterwards 
rose  to  great  consideration,  and  died  a  martyr  under  Maximi- 
nus. 

Alexander,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  made  earnest  of  the 
Origenistic  doctrine  of  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son 
(which  was  afterwards  taught  by  Athanasius  and  the  Nicene 
creed,  but  in  a  deeper  sense,  as  denoting  the  generation  of  a 
person  of  the  same  substance  from  the  substance  of  the  Fatlier, 
and  not  of  a  person  of  different  substance  from  the  loill  of  the 
Father),  and  deduced  from  it  the  homo-ousia  or  consubstantiali- 
ty  of  the  Son  with  the  Father. 

Arius,'  a  presbyter  of  the  same  city  after  313,  who  is  repre- 
sented as  a  tall,  thin,  learned,  adroit,  austere,  and  fascinating 
man,  but  proud,  artful,  restless,  and  disputatious,  pressed  and 
overstated  the  Origenistic  view  of  the  subordination,  accused 
Alexander  of  Sabellianism,  and  taught  that  Christ,  while  he 
was  indeed  the  creator  of  the  world,  was  himself  a  creature  of 
God,  therefore  not  truly  divine.'' 

The  contest  between  these  two  views  broke  out  about  the 
year  318  or  320. /*Arius  and  his  followers,,£^^-^hcir-<fcnial  of 
-the  tisRe  deify-^-Ohri^  were  deposed  and  excommunicated  by 
a  council  of  a  hundred  Egyptian  and  Libyan  bishops  at  Alex- 
andi'ia  in  321.  In  spite  of  this  he  continued  to  hold  religious 
assemblies  of  his  numerous  adherents,  and  when  driven  from 

*  'Apeios. 

"  This,  however,  is  manifestly  contrary  to  Origen's  view,  which  made  Christ  an 
intermediate  being  between  the  uncreated  Father  and  the  creature.  Contra  Cels.  iii. 
34. 


'/^  ^^i^  ^eil/  ^  ^<^   ^  r^u^^  ci  Lf€^  /ta^  Uit.  ^in^^  c-.^iL  -fUc^ 


I 


J 


§    119.      THE   AKIAN    CONTKOVEKSY.  621 

Alexandria,  agitated  his  doctrine  in  Palestine  and  Isicomedia, 
and  diffused  it  in  an  entertaining  work,  half  poctr j,  half  prose : 
The  Banquet  {OdXeia),  of  which  a  few  fragments  are  preserved 
in  Athanasiiis.  Several  bishops,  especially  Eusebins  of  Kico- 
media  and  Eusebius  of  Cassarea,  who  either  shared  his  view  or 
at  least  considered  it  innocent,  defended  him.  Alexander 
issued  a  number  of  circular  letters  to  all  the  bishops  against 
the  apostates  and  Exukontians.'  Bishop  rose  against  bishop, 
and  province  against  province.  The  controversy  soon  in- 
volved, through  the  importance  of  the  subject  and  the  zeal  of 
the  parties,  the  entire  church,  and  transformed  the  whole 
Christian  East  into  a  theological  battle-field. 

Constautine,  the  first  emperor  who  mingled  in  the  religious 
affairs  of  Christendom,  and  who  did  this  from  a  political, 
monarchical  interest  for  the  unity  of  the  empire  and  of  religion, 
was  at  first  inclined  to  consider  the  contest  a  futile  logomachy, 
and  endeavored  to  reconcile  the  parties  in  diplomatic  style  by 
letters  and  by  the  personal  mission  of  the  aged  bishop  Hosius 
of  Spain ;  but  without  effect.  Questions  of  theological  and 
religious  principle  are  not  to  be  adjusted,  like  political  meas- 
ures, by  compromise,  but  must  be  fought  through  to  theu' 
last  results,  and  the  truth  must  either  conquer  or  (for  the  time) 
succumb.  Then,  in  pursuance,  as  he  thought,  of  a  "divine 
inspiration,"  and  probably  also  with  the  advice  of  bishops  who 
were  in  friendship  with  him,*  he  summoned  the  first  universal 
council,  to  represent  the  whole  church  of  the  empire,  and  to 
give  a  final  decision  upon  the  relation  of  Christ  to  God,  and 
upon  some  minor  questions  of  discipline,  the  time  of  Easter, 
and  the  Meletian  schism  in  Egypt. 

^  Oi  e|  ovK  ovTocv.  So  he  named  the  Arians,  foi"  their  assertion  that  the  Son  of 
God  was  made  e|  oIk.  ovtuv,  out  of  nothing. 

^  At  least  Rufinus  says,  H.  E.  i.  1 :  "  Ex  sacerdotum  sententia."  Probably 
Hosius  and  Eusebius  of  Cossarea  had  most  influence  with  the  emperor  in  this  matter, 
as  in  others.  But  of  any  cooperation  of  the  pope  in  the  summoning  of  the  council 
of  Nicaea  the  earliest  documents  know  nothing. 


622  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


§  120.     The  Council  of  Mema,  325. 

SOUEOES. 

(1)  The  twenty  Cano>t:s,  the  doctrinal  Symbol,  and  a  Dkceee  of  the 

CotnsroiL  of  Nic^a,  and  several  Letters  of  bishop  Alexander  of  Alexan- 
dria and  the  emperor  Constantino  (all  collected  in  Greek  and  Latin  in 
Mansi:  Collect,  sacrorum  Conciliorum,  torn.  ii.  fol.  635-704).  Official 
minutes  of  the  transactions  themselves  were  not  at  that  time  made ; 
only  the  decrees  as  adopted  were  set  down  in  writing  and  subscribed 
by  aU  (comp.  Euseb.  Vita  Const,  iii.  14).  All  later  accounts  of  volu- 
minous acts  of  the  council  are  sheer  fabrications  (comp.  Hefele,  i.  p. 
249  sqq.) 

(2)  Accounts  of  eye-witnesses,  especially  EusEBnis,  Vita  Const,  iii.  4-24 

(superficial,  rather  Arianizing,  and  a  panegyric  of  the  emperor  Con- 
stantine).  The  Church  History  of  Eusebius,  which  should  have  closed 
with  the  council  of  Nice,  comes  down  only  to  the  year  324.  Atha- 
NAsius :  De  decretis  Synodi  Nic. ;  Orationes  iv  contra  Arianos ; 
Epist.  ad  Afros,  and  other  historical  and  anti- Arian  tracts  in  tom.  i.  and 
ii.  of  his  Opera,  ed.  Bened.  and  the  more  important  of  them  also  in  the 
first  vol.  of  Thilo's  Bibliotheca  Patrum  Grsec.  dogmat.  Lips.  1853. 
(Engl,  transl.  in  the  Oxford  Library  of  the  Fathers.) 

(3)  The  later  accounts  of  Epiphanitjs  :  Hfer.  69 ;   Sockates  :  H.  E.  i.  8 

sqq. ;  Sozomen  :  H.  E.  i.  17  sqq. ;  Theodoeet  :  H.  E.  i.  1-13 ;  Eufikts  : 
H.  E.  1. 1-6  (or  lib.  x.,  if  his  transl.  of  Eusebius  be  counted  in).  Gela- 
sius  Oyzicentjs  (about  476) :  Commentarius  actorum  Concilii  Nic^eni 
(Greek  and  Latin  in  Mansi,  tom.  ii.  fol.  759  sqq. ;  it  professes  to  bo 
founded  on  an  old  MS.,  but  is  filled  with  imaginary  speeches).  Comp. 
also  the  four  Coptic  fragments  in  Pitea  :  Spicilegium  Solesmense,  Par. 
1852,  vol.  i.  p.  509  sqq.,  and  the  Syriac  fragments  in  Analecta  Nicsena. 
Fragments  relating  to  the  Council  of  Nicasa.  The  Syriac  text  from  a« 
ancient  MS.  by  H.  Cowpee,  Lond.  1857. 

LITERATUEE. 

Of  the  historians  cited  at  §  119  must  be  here  especially  mentioned  Tille- 
MONT  (R.  C),  "Walch,  ScHEocKn,  Gibbon,  Hefele  (i.  pp.  249-426),  A. 
DE  Beoglie  (vol.  ii.  ch.  iv.  pp.  3-70),  and  Stanley.  Besides  them, 
Ittig:  Historia  concilii  Nicfeni,  Lips.  1712.  Is.  Botle:  A  historical 
View  of  the  Council  of  Nice,  with  a  translation  of  Documents,  New 
York,  1856  (in  Cruse's  ed.  of  Euseb. 's  Church  History)./'''Comp.  also 
§§  65  and  66  above,  where  this  in  connection  with  the  ofher  ecumeni- 
cal councils  has  already  been  spoken  of 

Nicsea,  the  very  name  of  which  sjDeaks  of  victory,  was  the 
second  city  of  Bithynia,  only  twenty  English  miles  from  the 


^j    jy,r^K^r^t(3rx.^^,    -        -    i-'-<^ 


e^^iS^-^Cery^^^' 


^^     ^ 


^ _  y^  io  aow  a  mlseraoio 

village,  shelteriug  some  thirty  Greek  and 
about  as  maay  Turkish  families.  Externally 
the  double  walls,  majestic  gates  aad  lofty 
towers  of  the  ancient  precinct,  still  well  pre- 
served, would  seem  to  annoilnce  a  town  of 
great  importance,  but  within  all  is  ruin  and 
decay,  deserted  and  dead.  The  palaces  of  the 
LaBcaris,  the  temples  of  the  Greeks  and 
Romans,  even  the  latj^,Bio8q\ies  built  by  the 
Osmanlis  at  the  conar-estKa^.  have  disappear- 
ed in  the  genei'al  rmn.  Thfifeituation  of  this 
village  is  nev^heleas  ilfsMlrTeUouily  fine.    In 


fourteen 

nd  around 

St  trees,  ex- 

ow- capped 

the  distance. 


front  is  the  glorious  LakttjM* 
miles  loiig  by  fo\ir  in  bvead 
rise  green  iills.  wooded  wl 
tending  to  Olympus,  wh\ 
heights  are  dietinctly  visibl 
The  beauty  of  the  site  and  .prospect  would 
invite  one  to  prblong  one's  btay  and  adniire 
the  scenery  yet  awhile ;  but  with  Niccea  the 
healthy  climate  has  also  disappeared.  Marshy 
patches  have  been  formed  in  the  neighbor- 
Siood  around,  rendering  the  reaideuce  uu- 
healthr,  as  p^iaf  ally  evidenced  by  the  paUid 
and  eiiualid  io>>k3  of  tiie  acaaty  populatiou." 


1 


§   120.      THE   COUNCIL   OF   NICiEA.  623 

imperial  residence  of  Nicomedia,  and  easily  accessible  by  sea 
and  land  from  all  parts  of  the  empire.  It  is  now  a  miserable 
Turkish  village,  Is-nik/  where  nothing  but  a  rude  picture  in  the 
solitary  church  of  St.  Mary  remains  to  the  memory  of  the 
event  which  has  given  the  place  a  name  in  the  history  of  the 
world. 

Hither,  in  the  year  325,  the  twentieth  of  his  reign  (there- 
fore the  festive  vicennalia),  the  emperor  summoned  the  bishops 
of  the  empire  by  a  letter  of  invitation,  putting  at  their  service 
the  public  conveyances,  and  liberally  defraying  fi'om  the  pub- 
lic treasury  the  expenses  of  their  residence  in  Nicsea  and  of 
their  return.  Each  bishop  was  to  bring  with  him  two  presby- 
ters and  three  servants."  They  travelled  partly  in  the  public 
post  carriages,  partly  on  horses,  mules,  or  asses,  partly  on  foot. 
Many  came  to  bring  their  private  disputes  before  the  emperor, 
who  caused  all  their  papers,  without  reading  them,  to  be 
burned,  and  exhorted  the  parties  to  reconciliation  and  har- 
mony. ^       """ 

The  whole  number  of  bishops  assembled  was  at  most  three 
hundred  and  eighteen;^  that  is,  about  one  sixth  of  all  the 


'  I.  e.,  £is  tilKaiav,  like  Stambul,  Is-tam-M,  from  e.'s  tV  iroKiv.  Isnik  now  con- 
tains only  some  fifteen  hundred  inhabitants.^ 

^  The  imperial  letter  of  convocation  is  not  extant.  Eusebius  says,  Yita  Const. 
iii.  6,  the  emperor  by  very  respectful  letters  invited  the  bishops  of  aU  countries  to 
come  with  all  speed  to  Xicsea  [aTT^vZeiu  aKavrax^^^f  tovs  iiricfKOTtovs  ypd/xi^aai  TtfMrjri- 
Ko7s  TTpoKaXovfj.fuos).  Alius  also  was  invited  (Rufinus,  H,  E.  i.  1).  In  an  invitation 
of  Constantine  to  the  bishop  of  Syracuse  to  attend  the  council  of  Aries  (as  given  by 
Eusebius,  H.  E.  x.  c.  5),  the  emperor  directs  him  to  bring  with  him  two  priests  and 
three  servants,  and  promises  to  defray  the  travelling  expenses.  The  same  was  no 
doubt  done  at  the  council  of  Xice.     Comp.  Eus.  V.  Const,  iii.  6  and  9. 

^  According  to  Athanasius  (Ad  Afros,  c.  2,  and  elsewhere),  Socrates  (H.  E.  1.  8), 
Theodoret  (H.  E.  i.  1),  and  the  usual  opinion.  The  spirit  of  mystic  interpretation 
gave  to  the  number  318,  denoted  in  Greek  by  the  letters  TIH,  a  reference  to  the 
cross  (T),  and  to  the  holy  name  Jesus  (iHo-ovs).  It  was  also  (Ambrose,  De  fide,  i. 
18)  put  in  connection  with  the  three  hundred  and  eighteen  servants  of  Abraham, 
the  father  of  the  faithful  (Gen.  xiv.  14).  Eusebius,  however,  gives  only  two  hundred 
and  fifty  bishops  {■neuTi]Kovra  koX  StaKoirluu  api^fioi/),  or  a  few  over ;  but  with  an 
Indefinite  number  of  attendant  priests,  deacons,  and  acolyths  (Tit.  Const,  iii.  8). 
The  later  Arabic  accounts  of  more  than  two  thousand  bishops  probably  arose  from 
confounding  bishops  and  clergy  in  general.  Perhaps  the  number  of  members 
increased  towards  the  close,  so  that  Eusebius  with  his  250,  and  Athanasius  with  liia 


624:  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

bishops  of  the  empn^e,  who  are  estimated  as  at  least  eighteen 
hundred  (one  thousand  for  the  Greek  provinces,  eight  hundred 
for  the  Latin),  and  only  half  as  many  as  were  at  the  council 
of  Chalcedon.  Including  the  presbyters  and  deacons  and 
other  attendants  the  number  may  have  amounted  to  between 
fifteen  hundred  and  two  thousand.  Most  of  the  Eastern  prov- 
inces were  strongly  represented;  the  Latin  church,  on  the 
contrary,  had  only  seven  delegates:  from  Spain  Hosius  of 
Cordova,  from  France  Nicasius  of  Dijon,  from  North  Africa 
Csecilian  of  Carthage,  from  Pannonia  Domnus  of  Stride,  from 
Italy  Eustorgius  of  Milan  and  Marcus  of  Calabria,  from  Home 
the  two  presbyters  Victor  or  Vitus  and  Vincentius  as  delegates 
of  the  aged  pope  Sylvester  I.  A  Persian  bishop  John,  also, 
and  a  Gothic  bishop,  Theophilus,  the  forerunner  and  teacher 
of  the  Gothic  Bible  translator  Ulfilas,  were  present. 

The  formal  sessions  began,  after  preliminary  disputations 
between  Catholics,  Ai-ians,  and  philosophers,  probably  about 
Pentecost,  or  at  farthest  after  the  arrival  of  the  emperor  on 
the  14th  of  June.  They  closed  on  the  25th  of  July,  the 
anniversary  of  the  accession  of  Constantino;  though  the 
members  did  not  disperse  till  the  25th  of  August.'  They 
were  held,  it  appears,  part  of  the  time  in  a  church  or  some 
public  building,  part  of  the  mne  in  the  emperor's  house. 

The  formal  opening  of  the  council  was  made  by  the  stately 
entrance  of  the  emperor,  which  Eusebius  in  his  panegyrical 
flattery  thus  describes:'^  "After  all  the  bishops  had  entered 
the  central  building  of  the  royal  palace,  on  the  sides  of  which 
very  many  seats  were  prepared,  each  took  his  place  with 
becoming  modesty,  and  silently  awaited  the  arrival  of  the 
emperor.     The  court  officers  entered  one  after  another,  though 

318,  may  both  be  right.  The  extant  Latin  lists  of  the  subscribers  contain  the 
names  of  no  more  than  two  hundred  and  twenty-four  bishops  and  chorepiscopi,  and 
many  of  these  are  mutilated  and  distorted  by  the  mistakes  of  transcribers,  and  varied 
in  the  different  copies.  Comp.  the  Ust  from  an  ancient  Coptic  cloister  in  Pitra's 
Spicilegium  Solesmense  (Par.  1852),  torn.  i.  p.  516  sqq. ;  and  Ilefele,  Concihengesch. 
i.  284. 

*  On  the  various  dates,  comp.  Hefele,  1.  c.  i.  p.  261  sqq.  Broglic,  ii.  26,  puts 
the  arrival  of  the  emperor  earlier,  on  the  4th  or  5th  of  June. 

^  Vita  Const,  iii,  10.     The  above  translation  is  somewhat  abridged. 


J 


§   120.      THE   COUNCIL   OF   NICJilA.  625 

only  Bucli  as  professed  faith  in  Christ.  The  moment  the 
approach  of  the  emperor  was  annomiced  by  a  given  signal, 
they  all  rose  from  their  seats,  and  the  emperor  appeared  like  a 
heavenly  messenger  of  God/  covered  with  gold  and  gems,  a 
glorious  presence,  very  tall  and  slender,  full  of  beauty,  strength, 
and  majesty.  With  this  external  adornment  he  united  the 
spiritual  ornament  of  the  fear  of  God,  modesty,  and  humility, 
which  could  be  seen  in  his  downcast  eyes,  his  blushing  face, 
the  motion  of  bis  body,  and  his  walk.  When  he  reached  the 
golden  throne  prepared  for  him,  he  stopped,  and  sat  not  down 
till  the  bishops  gave  him  the  sign.  And  after  him  they  all 
resumed  their  seats." 

How  great  the  contrast  between  this  position  of  the  church 
and  the  time  of  her  persecution  but  scarcely  passed !  What  a 
revolution  of  opinion  in  bishops  who  had  once  feared  the 
Roman  emperor  as  the  worst  enemy  of  the*  church,  and  who 
now  greeted  the  same  emperor  in  his  half  barbarous  attire  as 
an  angel  of  God  from  heaven,  and*  gave  him,  though  not  yet 
even  baptized,  the  honorary  presidency  of  the  highest  assem- 
bly of  the  church ! 

After  a  brief  salutatory  address  from  the  bishop  on  the  right 
of  the  emperor,  by  which  we  are  most  probably  to  understand 
Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  the  emperor  himself  delivered  with  a 
gentle  voice  in  the  official  Latin  tongue  the  opening  address, 
which  was  immediately  after  translated  into  Greek,  and  runs 
thus : " 

"  It  was  my  highest  wish,  my  friends,  that  I  might  be  per- 
mitted to  enjoy  your  assembly.  I  must  thank  God  that,  in 
addition  to  all  other  blessings,  he  has  shown  me  this  highest 
one  of  all :  to  see  you  all  gathered  here  in  harmony  and  with 
one  mind.  May  no  malicious  enemy  rob  us  of  this  happiness, 
and  after  the  tyranny  of  the  enemy  of  Christ  [Licinius  and  his 
army]  is  conquered  by  the  help  of  the  Kedeemer,  the  wicked 
demon  shall  not  persecute  the  divine  law  with  new  blasphe- 

Ola  Qeov  ris  ovp6.vi.os  ^yy^Kos. 
-  According  to  Eusebius,  1.  c.  iii.  c.  12.     Sozomen,  Socrates,  and  Rufinus  also 
give  the  emperor's  speech,  some's-hat  dififerently,  but  in  substantial  agreement  with 
this. 

VOL.  IT. 40 


626  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

mies.  Discord  in  the  cliurch  I  consider  more  fearful  and  pain- 
ful than  any  other  war.  As  soon  as  I  by  the  help  of  God  had 
overcome  my  enemies,  I  believed  that  nothing  more  was  now 
necessary  than  to  give  thanks  to  God  in  common  joy  with 
those  whom  I  had  liberated.  But  when  I  heard  of  your  divi- 
sion, I  was  convmced  that  this  matter  should  by  no  means  be 
neglected,  and  in  the  desire  to  assist  by  my  service,  I  have 
summoned  you  without  delay.  I  shall,  however,  feel  my 
desire  fulfilled  only  when  I  see  the  minds  of  all  united  in  that 
peaceful  harmony  which  you,  as  the  anointed  of  God,  must 
preach  to  others.  Delay  not  therefore,  my  friends,  delay  not, 
servants  of  God ;  put  away  all  causes  of  strife,  and  loose  all 
knots  of  discord  by  the  laws  of  peace.  Thus  shall  you  accom- 
plish the  work  most  pleasing  to  God,  and  confer  upon  me, 
your  fellow  servant,'  an  exceeding  great  joy." 

After  this  address  he  gave  way  to  the  (ecclesiastical)  presi- 
dents of  the  council,^  and  the  business  began.  The  emperor, 
however,  constantly  took  an  active  part,  and  exercised  a  con- 
siderable influence. 

Among  the  fathers  of  the  council,  besides  a  great  number 
of  obscure  mediocrities,  there  were  several  distinguished  and 
venerable  men.  Eusebius  of  Csesarea  was  most  eminent  for 
learning ;  the  young  archdeacon  Athanasius,  who  accompanied 
the  bishop  Alexander  of  Alexandria,  for  zeal,  intellect,  and 
eloquence.  Some,  as  confessors,  still  bore  in  their  body  the 
marks  of  Christ  from  the  times  of  persecution :  Paphnutius  of 
the  Upper  Thebaid,  Potamon  of  Heraklea,  whose  right  eye 
had  been  put  out,  and  Paul  of  ITeo-Csesarea,  who  had  been 
tortured  with  red  hot  iron  under  Licinius,  and  crippled  in  both 
his  hands.  Others  were  distinguished  for  extraordinary  as- 
cetic holiness,  and  even  for  mu'aculous  works ;  like  Jacob  of 
Nisibis,  who  had  spent  years  as  a  hermit  in  forests  and  caves, 
and  lived  like  a  wild  beast  on  roots  and  leaves,  and  Spyridion 
(or  St.  Spiro)  of  Cyprus,  the  patron  of  the  Ionian  isles,  who 

'  To!  vfxertpco  crvv^epdirovTi. 

^  riapeSiSou  rhv  \6yov  To~is  ttjs  ffvv6^ov  irpofSpois,  says  Euseb.  iii.  13. 
The  question  of  the  presidency  in  the  ecumenical  councils  has  already  been  spoken 
of  in  §  65. 


i 


§   120.      THE   COUNCIL   OF   NICiEA.  627 

even  after  his  ordination  remained  a  simj)le  shepherd.  Of  the 
Eastern  bishops,  Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  and  of  the  "Western, 
Hosius,  or  Osiiis,  of  Cordova/  had  the  greatest  influence  ^vith 
the  emperor.  These  two  probably  sat  by  his  side,  and  pre- 
sided in  the  deliberations  alternately  with  the  bishops  of  Alex- 
andi'ia  and  Antioch. 

In  reference  to  the  theological  question  the  council  was 
divided  in  the  beginning  into  three  parties.* 

The  orthodox  party,  which  held  fii-mly  to  the  deity  of 
Christ,  was  at  first  in  the  minority,  but  in  talent  and  influence 
the  more  weighty.  At  the  head  of  it  stood  the  bishop  (or 
"pope")  Alexander  of  Alexandria,  Eustathius  of  Antioch, 
Macarius  of  Jerusalem,  Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  Hosius  of  Cor- 
dova (the  court  bishop),  and  above  all  the  Alexandrian  arch- 
deacon, Athanasius,  who,  though  small  and  young,  and, 
according  to  later  practice  not  admissible  to  a  voice  or  a  seat 
in  a  council,  evinced  more  zeal  and  insight  than  all,  and  gave 
promise  already  of  being  the  future  head  of  the  orthodox 
party. 

The  Arians  or  Eusebians  numbered  perhaps  twenty  bish- 
ops, under  the  lead  of  the  influential  bishop  Eusebius  of  IS'ico- 
media  (afterwards  of  Constantinople),  who  was  allied  with  the 
imperial  family,  and  of  the  presbyter  Arius,  who  attended  at 
the  command  of  the  emperor,  and  was  often  called  upon  to  set 
forth  his  views.'  To  these  also  belonged  Theognis  of  J^icgea, 
Maris  of  Chalcedon,  and  Menophantus  of  Ephesus ;  embracing 
in  this  remarkable  way  the  bishops  of  the  several  seats  of  the 
orthodox  ecumenical  councils. 

The  majority,  whose  organ  was  the  renowned  historian 

*  Athanasius  always  calls  him  the  Great,  b  (xiyas. 

*  The  ancient  and  the  Roman  CathoUc  historians  (and  A.  de  Broglie,  1.  c.  voL 
ii.  p.  21)  generally  assmne  only  two  parties,  an  orthodox  majority  and  a  heretical 
minority.  But  the  position  of  Eusebius  of  Caesarea,  the  character  of  his  confession, 
and  the  subsequent  history  of  the  controversy,  prove  the  existence  of  a  middle, 
semi-Arian  party.  Athanasius,  too,  who  usually  puts  all  shades  of  opponents 
together,  accuses  Eusebius  of  Caesarea  and  others  repeatedly  of  insincerity  in  their 
subscription  of  the  Kicene  creed,  and  yet  these  were  not  proper  Arians,  but  scmi- 
Arians. 

'  Rufinus,  i,  5  :  "Evocabatur  frequenter  Arius  in  conciUum." 


628  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590.      • 

Eusebiiis  of  Caesarea,  took  middle  ground  between  the  right 
and  the  left,  but  bore  nearer  the  right,  and  finally  went  over 
to  that  side.  Many  of  them  had  an  orthodox  instinct,  but 
little  discernment ;  others  were  disciples  of  Origen,  or  preferred 
simple  biblical  expression  to  a  scholastic  terminology ;  others 
had  no  firm  conrictious,  but  only  uncertain  opinions,  and  were 
therefore  easily  swayed  by  the  arguments  of  the  stronger  party 
or  by  mere  external  considerations. 

The  Ai'ians  first  proposed  a  creed,  which  however  was 
rejected  with  tumultuous  disapproval,  and  torn  to  pieces; 
"whereupon  all  the  eighteen  signers  of  it,  excepting  Theonas 
and  Secundus,  both  of  Egypt,  abandoned  the  cause  of  Arius. 

Then  the  church  historian  Eusebius,  in  the  name  of  the 
middle  party,  proposed  an  ancient  Palestinian  Confession, 
which  was  very  similar  to  the  Nicene,  and  acknowledged  the 
divine  natm-e  of  Christ  in  general  biblical  terms,  but  avoided 
the  term  in  question,  ofjuoovaLo^,  consubstantialis,  of  the 
same  essence.  The  emperor  had  already  seen  and  approved 
this  confession,  and  even  the  Arian  minority  were  ready  to 
accept  it. 

But  this  last  circumstance  itself  was  very  suspicious  to  the 
extreme  right.  They  wished  a  creed  which  no  Arian  could 
honestly  subscribe,  and  especially  insisted  on  inserting  the 
Q  expression  Jiomo-fisios,  which  the  Arians  hated  and  declared  to 

^  be  unscriptural,  SabeUian,  and  materialistic.^     The   emperor 

saw  clearly  that  the  Eusebian  formula  would  not  pass ;  and,  as 
he  had  at  heart,  for  the  sake  of  peace,  the  most  nearly  unani- 
mous decision  which  was  possible,  he  gave  his  voice  for  the 
disputed  word. 

Then  Hosius  of  Cordova  appeared  and  announced  that  a 
confession  was  prepared  which  would  now  be  read  by  the 
deacon  (afterwards  bishop)  Hermogeues  of  CEesarea,  the  secre- 

^  Athanasius  himself,  however,  Laid  little  stress  on  the  term,  and  rarely  used  it --^ 
in  his  theological  expositions ;  he  cared  more  for  the  tiling  than  the  nam^    The 
•word  ofiouvaios,  from  6fj.6s  and  ovcria,  was  not  an  invention  of  the  council  of  Nic^,  i^ 
still  less  of  Constantine,  but  had  previously  arisen  in  theological  language,  and 
occurs  even  in  Origen  and  among  the  Gnostics,  though  of  course  it  is  no  more  to  be 
found  in  the  Bible  than  the  word  trimty. 


^  9.  U7  w;-. 


4e  </jfn^.  4  /. 


§    120.      THE   COUNCIL   OF   NIC^A.  629 

tary  of  the  synod.  It  is  in  substance  the  well-known  Niceue 
creed,  with  some  additions  and  omissions  of  which  we  are  to 
speak  below.  It  is  somewhat  abrupt ;  the  council  not  caring 
to  do  more  than  meet  the  immediate  exigency.  The  direct 
concern  was  only  to  establish  the  doctrine  of  the  true  deity  of 
the  Son.  The  deity  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  though  inevitably 
involved,  did  not  then  come  up  as  a  subject  of  special  dis- 
cussion, and  therefore  the  synod  contented  itself  on  this 
point  with  the  sentence:  "And  (we  believe)  in  the  Holy 
Ghost." '  The  council  of  Constantinople  enlarged  the  last 
article  concerning  the  Holy  Ghost.  To  the  positive  part  of 
the  Niceue  confession  is  added  a  condemnation  of  the 
Arian  heresy,  which  dropped  out  of  the  formula  afterwards 
received. 

Almost  all  the  bishoj^s  subscribed  the  creed,  Hosius  at  the 
head,  and  next  him  the  two  Roman  presbyters  in  the  name  of 
their  bishop.  This  is  the  first  instance  of  such  signing  of  a 
document  in  the  Christian  church.  Eusebius  of  Csesarea  also 
signed  his  name  after  a  day's  deliberation,  and  vindicated 
this  act  in  a  letter  to  his  diocese.  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  and 
Theognis  of  Nicsea  subscribed  the  creed  without  the  condem- 
natory formula,  and  for  this  they  were  deposed  and  for  a  time 
banished,  but  finally  consented  to  all  the  decrees  of  the  coun- 
cil. The  Arian  historian  Philostorgius,  who  however  deserve;^ 
little  credit,''  accuses  them  of  insincerity  in  having  substituted, 
by  the  advice  of  the  emperor,  for  o/jio-ovaio'i  (of  the  same  essence) 
the  semi-Arian  word  6fioi-oua-Lo<;  (of  like  essence).  Only 
two  Egyptian  bishops,  Theonas  and  Secundus,  persistently 
refused  to  sign,  and  were  banished  with  Arius  to  Illyria.     The 

'  Dr.  Shedd,  therefore,  is  plainly  incorrect  in  saying,  Hist,  of  Chr.  Doctrine,  vol. 
i.  p.  308 :  "  The  problem  to  be  solved  by  the  Nicene  council  was  to  exhibit  the  doc- 
trine of  the  trinity  in  its  completeness ;  to  bring  into  the  creed  statement  the  total 
data  of  Scripture  upon  both  the  side  of  unity  and  trinity."  This  was  not  done  till 
the  council  of  Constantinople  in  381,  and  strictly  not  till  the  still  later  Symbolum 
Athanasianiun. 

°  Even  Gibbon  (ch.  xsi.)  places  very  little  dependence  on  this  historian :  "  The 
credibility  of  Philostorgius  is  lessened,  in  the  eyes  of  the  orthodox,  by  his  Arianism  ; 
and  in  those  of  rational  critics  [as  if  the  oi'thodox  were  necessarily  irrational  and 
uncritical !]  by  his  passion,  his  prejudice,  and  his  ignorance." 


630  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

books  of  Ai'ius  were  burned  and  his  followers  branded  as  ene- 
mies of  Christianity.' 

This  is  the  first  example  of  the  civil  punishment  of  heresy ; 
and  it  is  the  beginning  of  a  long  succession  of  civil  persecu- 
tions for  all  dej)artures  from  the  Catholic  faith.  Before  the 
union  of  church  and  state  ecclesiastical  excommunication  was 
the  extreme  penalty.  !Now  banishment  and  afterwards  even 
death  were  added,  because  all  offences  against  the  church  were 
regarded  as  at  the  same  time  crimes  against  the  state  and  civil 
society. 

The  two  other  points  on  which  the  council  of  Nicsea  decided, 
the  Easter  question  and  the  Meletian  schism,  have  been  already 
spoken  of  in  their  place.  The  council  issued  twenty  canons  in 
reference  to  discipline.  The  creed  and  the  canons  were  writ- 
ten in  a  book,  and  again  signed  by  the  bishops.  The  council 
issued  a  letter  to  the  Egyptian  and  Libyan  bishops  as  to  the 
decision  of  the  three  main  points ;  the  emperor  also  sent  sev- 
eral edicts  to  the  churches,  in  which  he  ascribed  the  decrees  to 
divine  inspiration,  and  set  them  forth  as  laws  of  the  realm. 
On  the  twenty-ninth  of  July,  the  twentieth  anniversary  of  his 
accession,  he  gave  the  members  of  the  council  a  splendid  ban- 
quet in  his  palace,  which  Eusebius  (quite  too  susceptible  to 
worldly  splendor)  describes  as  a  figure  of  the  reign  of  Christ  on 
earth ;  he  remunerated  the  bishops  lavishly,  and  dismissed 
them  with  a  suitable  valedictory,  and  with  letters  of  commen- 
dation to  the  authorities  of  all  the  provinces  on  their  home- 
ward way. 

Thus  ended  the  council  of  Xicsea.  It  is  the  first  and  most 
venerable  of  the  ecumenical  synods,  and  next  to  the  apostolic 
council  at  Jerusalem  the  most  important  and  the  most  illus- 
trious of  all  the  councils  of  Christendom.  Athanasius  calls  it 
"  a  true  monument  and  token  of  victory  against  every  heresy  ; " 

'  Jerome  (Adv.  Lucifer,  c.  20;  Opera,  ed.  Vallars.  torn.  ii.  p.  192  sqq.)  asserts, 
on  the  authority  of  aged  witnesses  then  still  living,  that  Arius  and  his  adherents 
were  pardoned  even  before  the  close  of  the  council.  Socrates  also  says  (H.  E.  i.  c. 
14)  that  Arius  was  recalled  from  banishment  before  Eusebius  and  Theognis,  but 
under  prohibition  of  return  to  Alexandria.  This  isolated  statement,  however,  ciin- 
not  well  be  harmonized  with  the  subsequent  recalling,  and  probably  arose  from 
some  confusion. 


_J 


§    120.      THE 'council,   of    NIC-ilA..  631 

Leo  the  Great,  like  Constantine,  attributes  its  decrees  to  the 
inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  ascribes  even  to  its  canons 
perpetual  validity;  the  Greek  church  annually  observes  (on 
the  Sunday  before  Pentecost)  a  special  feast  in  memory  of  it. 
There  afterwards  arose  a  multitude  of  apocryphal  orations  and 
legends  in  glorification  of  it,  of  which  Gelasius  of  Cyzicus  in 
the  fifth  century  collected  a  whole  volume.* 

The  council  of  Nicfea  is  the  most  important  event  of  the 
fourth  century,  and  its  bloodless  intellectual  victory  over  a 
dangerous  error  is  of  far  greater  consequence  to  the  progress 
of  true  civilization,  than  all  the  bloody  victories  of  Constantine 
and  his  successors.  It  forms  an  epoch  in  the  history  of  doc- 
trine, summing  up  the  results  of  all  previous  discussions  on  the 
deity  of  Christ  and  the  incarnation,  and  at  the  same  time 
regulating  the  further  development  of  the  Catholic  orthodoxy 
for  eenturies.  The  ITicene  creed,  in  the  enlarged  form  which 
it  received  after  the  second  ecumenical  council,  is  the  only  one 
of  all  the  symbols  of  doctrine  which,  with  the  exception  of  the 
subsequently  added  Jilioque,  is  acknowledged  alike  by  the 
Greek,  the  Latin,  and  the  Evangelical  churches,  and  to  thib 
day,  after  a  course  of  fifteen  centuries,  is  prayed  and  sung 
from  Sunday  to  Sunday  in  all  countries  of  the  civilized  world. 
The  Apostles'  Creed  indeed,  is  much  more  generally  used  in 
the  West,  and  by  its  greater  simplicity  and  more  popular 
form  is  much  better  adapted  to  catechetical  and  liturgical  pur- 
poses ;  but  it  has  taken  no  root  in  the  Eastern  church ;  still 
less  the  Athanasian  Creed,  which  exceeds  the  I^icene  in  logical 
precision  and  completeness.  Upon  the  bed  of  lava  grows  the 
sweet  fruit  of  the  xiue.  The  wild  passions  and  the  weaknesses 
of  men,  which  encompassed   the  Nicene   council,  are  extin- 

*  Stanly  inter-weaves  several  of  these  miraculous  legends  with  graphical  minute- 
ness into  the  text  of  his  narrative,  thus  giving  it  the  interest  of  romance,  at  the 
expense  of  the  dignity  of  historical  statement.  The  simple  Spyridion  performed,  on 
his  journey  to  the  Council,  the  amazing  feat  of  restoring  in  the  dark  his  two  mules 
to  life  by  annexing  the  white  head  to  the  chestnut  mule,  and  the  chestnut  head  to 
its  white  companion,  and  overtook  the  rival  bishops  who  had  cut  off  the  heads  of 
the  mules  with  the  intention  to  prevent  the  rustic  bishop  from  reaching  Nicaea  and 
hurting  the  cause  of  orthodoxy  by  his  ignorance !  According  to  another  version  of 
this  silly  legend  the  decapitation  of  the  mules  is  ascribed  to  malicious  Arians.  » 


632  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

guislied,  but  tlie  faith  in  tlie  eternal  deity  of  Christ  has 
remained,  and  so  long  as  this  faith  lives,  the  council  of  Nicaea 
will  be  named  with  reverence  and  with  gratitude. 


§  121.     The  Arian  ajid  Semi-Arian  Reaction,  a.  d.  325-361. 

The  victory  of  the  council  of  Mcasa  over  the  views  of  the 
majority  of  the  bishops  was  a  victory  only  in  appearance.  It 
had,  to  be  sure,  erected  a  mighty  fortress,  in  which  the  defend- 
ers^of  the  essential  deity  of  Christ  might  ever  take  refuge 
from  the  assaults  of  heresy ;  and  in  this  view  it  was  of  the 
utmost  importance,  and  secured  the  final  triumph  of  the  truth. 
But  some  of  the  bishops  had  subscribed  the  homoousion  with 
reluctance,  or  from  regard  to  the  emperor,  or  at  best  with  the 
reservation  of  a  broad  interpretation;  and  with  a  change  of 
cii'cumstances  they  would  readily  turn  in  opposition.  The 
controversy  now  for  the  first  time  fairly  broke  loose,  and 
Arianism  entered  the  stage  of  its  political  development  and 
power.  An  intermediate  period  of  great  excitement  ensued, 
during  which  council  was  held  against  council,  creed  was  set 
forth  against  creed,  and  anathema  against  anathema  was 
hurled.  The  pagan  Ammianus  Marcellinus  says  of  the  coun- 
cils under  Constantius:  "The  highways  were  covered  with 
galloping  bishops ; "  and  even  Athanasius  rebuked  the  restless 
flutter  of  the  clergy,  who  journeyed  the  empire  over  to  find 
the  true  faith,  and  provoked  the  ridicule  and  contempt  of  the 
unbelieving  world.  In  intolerance  and  violence  the  Arians 
exceeded  the  orthodox,  and  contested  elections  of  bishops  not 
rarely  came  to  bloody  encounters.  The  interference  of  im- 
perial politics  only  poured  oil  on  the  flame,  and  embarrassed 
the  natural  course  of  the  theological  development. 

The  personal  history  of  Athanasius  was  interwoven  with 
the  doctrinal  controversy ;  he  threw  himself  wholly  into  the 
cause  which  he  advocated.  The  question  whether  his  deposi- 
tion was  legitimate  or  not,  was  ahnost  identical  witli  the  ques- 
tion whether  the  Nicene  Creed  should  prevail. 
.    Eusebius  of  Nicomcdia  and  Theognis  of  Nicsea  threw  all 


t 


\ 


^ 


OK^  yj^err>iM^-u<3,Ji-  1>0 


^'••*'/>iiA 


/ifi-yiu^^Sx  f'^e-H,, 


M.lt^\^  .A-Ui/eU   tx,^fU^;  "\^^ 


£re^icfU 


y 


r      1       ' 


/ 


^y  ^^ 


>^V'    jrnAiv    r/7///^r^v    y[ ^/V^t    Ct^v-vd.) 


l-^oi  , 


I  y* 


A 


; 


^      \ 


T-£/^p<-ru/v     £  i^j     /r~f /^ vi  T' ii>  y 


§   121.      THE   AKIAN   AND   SEMI-AKIAN   KEACTION.  633 

their  influence  against  tlie  adherents  of  the  homoousion.  Con- 
stantine  himself  was  turned  by  Eusebius  of  Caesarea,  who  stood 
beween  Athanasius  and  Arius,  by  his  sister  Constantia  and  her 
father  confessor,  and  by  a  vague  confession  of  Arius,  to  think 
more  favorably  of  Arius,  and  to  recall  him  from  exile. ''  JSTever- 
theless  he  afterv^ards,  as  before,  thought  himself  in  accordance 
with  the  orthodox  view  and  the  ISTicene  creed.  The  real  gist 
of  the  controversy  he  had  never  understood.  Athanasius,  who 
after  the  death  of  Alexander  in  April,  328/  became  bishop  of 
Alexandria  and  head  of  the  Nieene  party,  refused  to  reinstate 
the  heretic  in  his  former  position,  and  was  condemned  and 
deposed  for  false  accusations  by  two  Aj*ian  councils,  one  at 
Tyre  under  the  presidency  of  the  historian  Eusebius,  the  other 
at  Constantinople  in  the  year  335  (or  336),  and  banished  by 
the  emperor  to  Treves  in  Gaul  in  336,  as  a  disturber  of  the 
peace  of  the  church. 

Soon  after  this  Arius,  having  been  formally  acquitted  of 
the  charge  of  heresy  by  a  council  at  Jerusalem  (a.  d.  335),  was 
to  have  been  solemnly  received  back  into  the  fellowship  of  the 
church  at  ConstantinoiDle/    Siit  on  tho-ovom»^f-before~^te-4fi- 


\ 


fee  rrVj^agtloG,  he  suddenly  died  (a.  d.  336),  at  the  age  of  over 

eighty  years,  of  an  attack  like  cholera,  while  attending  to  a  call  '. 

of  nature.   This  death  was  regarded  by  many  as  a  divine  judg-^^'^^^^^;^^^^    y-^ 

jiiea^ ;  by  others,  it  was  attributed  to  poisoning  by  enemies ;    ^^^.^/M:(f/ 

by  others,  to  the  excessive  joy  of  Arius  in  his  triumph,'  i^i^^j  ^  v 

On  the  death  of  Constantine  (337),  who  had  shortly  before  "^ 

received  baptism  from  the  Arian  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia,  Atha- 
nasius was  recalled  from  his  banishment  (338)  by  Constantine 
II.  (t  340),  and  received  by  the  people  with  great  enthusiasm ; 
"more  joyously  than  ever  an  emperor."  ^     Some  months  after- 

'  According  to  the  Syriac  preface  to  the  Syriac  Festival  Letters  of  Athanasius, 
first  edited  by  Cureton  in  1848.  It  was  previously  supposed  that  Alexander  died 
two  years  earlier.     Comp.  Hefele,  i.  p.  429. 

"  Comp.  Athanasius,  De  mojie  Arii  Epist.  ad  Serapionem  (Opera,  torn.  i.  p.  340).  ^tm^ 

He  got  his  information  from  ais  priest  Macarius,  who  was  in  Constantinople  at  the 
time.  *;^5&*  f^ j  .    ->  -  -  ,, 

^  So  says  Gregory  Nazianzen.  The  date  of  his  return,  according  to  the  Festival 
Letters  of  Athanasius,  was  the  23d  November,  338. 


634  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

wards  (339)  he  held  a  council  of  nearly  a  hundred  bishops  in 
Alexandi'ia  for  the  vindication  of  the  Nicene  doctrine.  But 
this  was  a  temporary  triumph. 

In  the  East  Arianism  prevailed.  Constantius,  second  son 
of  Constantine  the  Great,  and  ruler  in  the  East,  together  with 
his  whole  com't,  was  attached  to  it  with  fanatical  intolerance. 
Eusebius  of  Kicomedia  was  made  bishop  of  Constantinople 
(338),  and  was  the  leader  of  the  Arian  and  the  more  moderate, 
but  less  consistent  semi- Arian  parties  in  their  common  opi30si- 
tion  to  Athanasius  and  the  orthodox  West.  Hence  the  name 
Eusebians^  Athanasius  was  for  a  second  time  deposed,  and 
took  refuge  with  the  bishop  Julius  of  Eome  (339  or  340),  who 
in  the  autumn  of  341  held  a  council  of  more  than  fifty  bishops 
in  defence  of  the  exile  and  for  the  condemnation  of  his  oppo- 
nents. The  whole  Western  church  was  in  general  more  stead- 
fast on  the  side  of  the  ISTicene  orthodoxy,  and  honored  in 
/-.  Athanasius  a  martyr  of  the  true  faith.     On  the  contrary  a 

(fiAhr  L'v'k  synod  dit  (Antiocfi,  held  under  the  direction  of  the  Eusebians  on 
^'  the  occasion  of  the  dedication  of  a  church  in  341,"  issued  twen- 
ty-five canons,  indeed,  which  were  generally  accej)ted  as  ortho- 
dox and  valid,  but  at  the  same  time  confii'med  the  deposition 
of  Athanasius,  and  set  forth  four  creeds,  which  rejected  Arian- 
ism, yet  avoided  the  orthodox  formula,  particularly  the  vexed 
ho7noousion.^ 

Thus  the  East  and  the  West  were  in  manifest  conflict. 

To  heal  this  division,  the  two  emperors,  Constantius  in  the 

East  and  Constans  in  the  West,  summoned  a  general  council 

A^.^**-    at  Sqrdicq  in  Illyria,  a.  d.  343."     Here  the  l^icene  party  and 

the  Eoman  influence  prevailed.*     Pope  Julius  was  represented 

*  Oi  TTgpJ  'E.vai^iov. 

*  Hence  called  the  council  in  encceniis  (iyKaiviois),  or  in  dedicatione. 

^  This  apparent  contradiction  between  orthodox  canons  and  semi-Arian  confes- 
sions has  occasioned  all  kinds  of  hypotheses  in  reference  to  this  Antiochian  synod. 
Comp.  on  them,  Ilefele,  i.  p.  486  sqq. 

*  Not  A.  D.  347,  as  formerly  supposed.     Comp.  Hefele,  i.  515  sqq. 

*  About  a  hundred  and  seventy  bishops  in  al^  /according  to  Athanasius)  were 
present  at  Sardica,  ninety-four  occidentals  and  seventy-six  orientals  or  Eusebians. 
Sozomen  and  Socrates,  on  the  contrary,  estimate  the  number  at  three  hundred.  The 
signatures  of  the  acts  of  the  council  are  lost,  excepting  a  defective  list  of  fifty-nine 
names  of  bishops  in  Hilary. 


§   121.      THE   AKIAN   AND   SEMI-AKIAN   KEACTION.  635 

bj  two  Italian  priests.  The  Spanish  bishop  Hosius  presided. 
The  Nicene  doctrine  was  here  confirmed,  and  twelve  canons 
■were  at  the  same  time  adopted,  some  of  which  are  very  impor- 
tant in  reference  to  discipline  and  the  authority  of  the  Roman 
see.  But  the  Ai'ianizing  Oriental  bishops,  dissatisfied  with  the 
admission  of  Athaaasius,  took  no  part  in  the  proceedings,  held 
an  opposition  council  in  the  neighboring  city  of  Philipj>opoliSy  JZ^y^^.^^A 
and  confirmed  the  decrees  of  the  council  of  Antioch.     The  /•^"'^ 

opposite  councils,  therefore,  inflamed  the  discord  of  the  church, 
instead  of  allaying  it. 

Constantius  was  compelled,  indeed,  by  his  brother  to  restore 
Athanasius  to  his  ofiice  in  34:6 ;  but  after  the  death  of  Con- 
stans,  A.  D.  350,  he  summoned  three  successive  synods  in  favor 
of  a  moderate  Arianism ;  one  at  Sirmium  in  Pannonia  (351), 
one  at  Arelate  or  Aries  in  Gaul  (353),  and  one  at  Milan  in 
Italy  (355) ;  he  forced  the  decrees  of  these  councils  on  the 
Western  church,  deposed  and  banished  bishops,  like  Liberius 
of  Rome,  Hosius  of  Cordova,  Hilary  of  Poictiers,  Lucifer  of 
Calaris,  who  resisted  them,  and  drove  Athanasius  from  the 
cathedral  of  Alexandria  during  divine  service  with  five  thou- 
sand  armed  soldiers,  and  supplied  his  j)lace  with  an  uned- 
ucated and  avaricious  Arian,  George  of  Cappadocia  (356). 
In  these  violent  measures  the  court  bishops  and  Eusebia,  the 
last  wife  of  Constantius  and  a  zealous  Arian,  had  great  in- 
fluence. Even  in  their  exile  the  faithful  adherents  of  the 
Nicene  faith  were  subjected  to  all  manner  of  abuse  and  vexa- 
tion. Hence  Constantius  was  vehemently  attacked  by  Atha- 
nasius, Hilary,  and  Lucifer,  compared  to  Pharaoh,  Saul,  Ahab, 
Belshazzar,  and  called  an  inhuman  beast,  the  forerunner  of 
Antichrist,  and  even  Antichrist  himself. 

Thus  Arianism  gained  the  ascendency  in  the  whole  Roman 
empire ;  though  not  in  its  original  rigorous  form,  but  in  the 
milder  form  of  homoi-ousianism  or  the  doctrine  of  similarity 
of  essence,  as  opposed  on  the  one  hand  to  the  I^icene  homo-ou- 
sianism  {sameness  of  essence),  and  on  the  other  hand  to  the 
Arian  hetero-ousianism  {difference  of  essence). 

Even  the  papal  chair  was  desecrated  by  heresy  during  this 
Arian  inteiTegnum  ;  after  the  deposition  of  Liberius,  the  deacon 


636  TfintD  PEEiOD.  A.D,  311-590. 

Felix  II.,  "by  anticln-istian  wickedness,"  as  Atiianasins  ex- 
presses it,  was  elected  Ms  successor.'  Many  Roman  historians 
for  this  reason  regard  him  as  a  mere  anti-pope.  But  in  the 
Roman  church  books  this  Felix  is  inserted,  not  only  as  a  legit- 
imate pope,  but  even  as  a  saint,  because,  according  to  a  much 
later  legend,  he  was  executed  by  Constantius,  whom  he  called 
a  heretic.  His  memory  is  celebrated  on  the  twenty-ninth  of 
July.  His  subsequent  fortunes  are  Yerj  differently  related. 
The  Roman  people  desired  the  recall  of  Liberius,  and  he, 
weary  of  exile,  was  prevailed  upon  to  apostatize  by  subscrib- 
ing an  Arian  or  at  least  Arianizing  confession,  and  maintain- 
ing church  fellowship  with  the  Eusebians."^  On  this  condition 
he  was  restored  to  his  papal  dignity,  and  received  with  enthu- 
siasm into  Rome  (358).  He  died  in  366  in  the  orthodox  faith, 
which  he  had  denied  through  weakness,  but  not  from  convic- 
tion. 

Even  the  almost  centennarian  bishop  Hosius  was  induced 
by  long  imprisonment  and  the  threats  of  the  emperor,  though 
not  himself  to  compose  (as  Hilary  states),  yet  to  subscribe  (as 
Athanasius  and  Sozomen  say),  the  Arian  formula  of  the  second 
council  of  Sirmium,  a.  d.  357,  but  soon  after  repented  his 
unfaithfulness,  and  condemned  the  Arian  heresy  shortly  before 
his  death. 

The  iS^icene  orthodoxy  was  thus  apparently  put  down. 
But  now  the  heretical  majority,  having  overcome  their  com- 
mon enemy,  made  ready  their  own  dissolution  by  divisions 
among  themselves.     They  separated  into  two  factions.     The 

'  Comp.  above,  §  72,  p.  371. 

*  The  apostasy  of  Liberius  comes  to  us  upon  the  clear  testimony  of  the  most 
orthodox  fethers,  Athanasius,  Hilary,  Jerome,  Sozomen,  &c.,  and  of  three  letters  of 
Liberius  himself,  which  Hilary  admitted  into  his  sixth  fragment,  and  accompanied 
with  some  remarks.  Jerome  says  in  his  Chronicle :  "  Liberius,  tffidio  victus  exilii, 
in  hsereticam  pravitatem  subscribens  Romam  quasi  victor  intravit."  Comp.  his 
Catal.  script,  eccl.  c.  97.  He  probably  subscribed  what  is  called  the  third  Sirmian 
formula,  that  is,  the  collection  of  Semi-Arian  decrees  adopted  at  the  third  council 
of  Sirmium  in  358.  Hefele  (i.  673),  from  his  Eoman  point  of  view,  knows  no  way 
of  saving  him  but  by  the  hypothesis  that  he  renounced  the  Nicene  word  (ofioovaws), 
but  not  the  Nicene  faiih.  But  this,  in  the  case  of  so  current  a  party  term  as 
oytiooi'o-ios,  which  Liberius  himself  afterwards  declared  "the  bulwark  against  all 
Arian  heresy"  (Socr.  H.  E.  iv.  12),  is  entirely  untenable. 


§   121.      THE   AKIAN   AND   SEMI-AKIAN  EEACTION.  G37 

riglit  wing,  the  Ensebians  or  Semi-Arians,  who  were  repre- 
sented by  Basil  of  Ancyra  and  Gregory  of  Laodieea,  main- 
tained that  the  Son  was  not  indeed  of  the  same  essence 
{6/jLo-ovaLos;),  yet  of  lilce  essence  {o/xoL-ovaio^),  with  the  Father. 
To  these  belonged  many  who  at  heart  agreed  with  the  Nicene 
faith,  but  either  harbored  prejudices  against  Athanasius,  or 
saw  in  the  term  ofio-ovaio^  an  approach  to  Sabellianism ;  for 
theological  science  had  not  yet  duly  fixed  the  distinction  of 
substance  {ovcria)  and  person  {vTroaraai^),  so  that  the  homoousia 
might  easily  be  confounded  with  unity  of  person.  The  left 
wing,  or  the  decided  Arians,  under  the  lead  of  Eudoxius  of 
Antioch,  his  deacon  Aetius,'  and  especially  the  bishop  Euno- 
mius  of  Cyzicus  in  Mysia '  (after  whom  they  were  called  also 
Eunomians),  taught  that  the  Son  was  of  a  different  essence 
{eTepoov(no<;),  and  even  unlike  the  Father  {av6/j,oLo<;),  and  created 
out  of  nothing  (e^  ovk  ovrwv).  They  received  also,  from  their 
standard  terms,  the  names  of  Hetermisiasts,  Anojno&ans,  and 
Exiikontians. 

A  number  of  councils  were  occupied  with  this  internal 
dissension  of  the  anti-Mcene  party :  two  at  Sirmium  (the 
second,  a.  d.  357;  the  third,  a,  d,  358),  one  at  Antioch  (358), 
one  2iV^ncyra  (358),  the  double  council  at  Seleucia  smdJtimi-  ^'i^'vun-^* 
^^/(359),  and  one  at  Constantinople  (360).  But  the  divis'on 
was  not  healed.  The  proposed  compromise  of  entirely  avoid- 
ing the  word  ovcrCa,  and  substituting  o/j.olo?,  like,  for  6fxoLova-io<;, 
of  like  essence,  and  dvofioio^,  unlike,  satisfied  neither  party. 
Constantius  vainly  endeavored  to  suppress  the  quarrel  by  his 
imperio-episcopal  power.  His  death  in  361  opened  the  way 
for  the  second  and  permanent  victory  of  the  Nicene  orthodoxy. 

'  He  was  hated  among  the  orthodox  and  Semi-Arians,  and  called  abio^.  He  was 
an  accomplished  dialectician,  a  physician  and  theological  author  iu  Antioch,  and 
died  about  S'/O  in  Constantinople. 

"  He  was  a  pupil  and  friend  of  Aetius,  and  popularized  his  doctrine.  He  died 
in  392.  Concerning  him,  comp.  Klose,  Geschichte  u.  Lehre  des  Eunomius,  Kiel, 
1833,  and  Domer,  1.  c.  vol.  i.  p.  853  sqq.  Dorner  calls  him  a  deacon ;  but  through 
the  mediation  of  the  bishop  Eudoxius  of  Constantinople  (formerly  of  Antioch)  he 
received  the  bishopric  of  Cyzicus  or  Cyzicum  as  early  as  360,  before  he  became  the 
head  of  the  Arian  party.     Theodoret,  H.  E.  1.  ii.  c.  29. 


iiiJ    ti- 


638  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


§  122.     The  Final  Victory  of  Orthodoxy^  and  the  Council  of 
Constantinople,  381. 

Julian  the  Apostate  tolerated  all  Christian  parties,  in  the 
hope  that  they  would  destroy  one  another.  With  this  view 
he  recalled  the  orthodox  bishops  from  exile.  Even  Athanasius 
returned,  but  was  soon  banished  again  as  an  "  enemy  of  the 
gods,"  and  recalled  by  Jovian.  ]!^ow  for  a  time  the  strife  of 
the  Christians  among  themselves  was  silenced  in  their  common 
warfare  against  paganism  revived.  The  Arian  controversy 
took  its  own  natural  course.  The  truth  regained  free  play, 
and  the  Nicene  spirit  was  permitted  to  assert  its  intrinsic 
power.  It  gradually  achieved  the  victory ;  first  in  the  Latin 
church,  which  held  several  orthodox  synods  in  Rome,  Milan, 
and  Gaul ;  then  in  Egypt  and  the  East,  through  the  wise  and 
energetic  administration,  of  Athanasius,  and  through  the  elo- 
quence and  the  writings  of  the  three  great  Cappadocian 
bishops  Basil,  Gregory  of  ISTazianzum,  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa. 

After  the  death  of  Athanasius  in  373,  Arianism  regained 
dominion  for  a  time  in  Alexandria,  and  practised  all  lands  of 
violence  upon  the  orthodox. 

In  Constantinople  Gregory  Kazianzen  labored,  from  379, 
with  great  success  in  a  small  congregation,  which  alone 
remained  true  to  the  orthodox  faith  during  the  Arian  rule; 
and  he  delivered  in  a  domestic  chapel,  which  he  significantly 
named  Anastasia  (the  church  of  the  Resurrection),  those 
renowned  discourses  on  the  deity  of  Christ  which  won  him  the 
title  of  the  Divine,  and  with  it  many  persecutions. 

The  raging  fanaticism  of  the  Arian  emperor  Yalens 
(361-378)  against  both  Semi-Arians  and  Athanasians  wrought 
an  approach  of  the  former  party  to  the  latter.  His  successor, 
Gratian,  was  orthodox,  and  recalled  the  banished  bishops. 

Thus  the  heretical  party  was  already  in  reality  intellectual- 
ly and  morally  broken,  when  the  emperor  Theodosius  I.,  or 
the  Great,  a  Spaniard  by  birth,  and  educated  in  the  Nicene 
faith,  ascended  the  throne,  and  in  his  long  and  powerful  reign 
(379-395)  externally  completed  the  triumph  of  orthodoxy  in 


§    122.      THE   FINAL   VICTOEY   OF   OETHODOXY.  639 

the  Eoman  empii-e.  Soon  after  liis  accession  lie  issued,  in  380, 
the  celebrated  edict,  in  -which  he  requii-ed  all  his  subjects  to 
confess  the  orthodox  faith,  and  threatened  the  heretics  with 
punishment.  After  his  entrance  into  Constantinople  he  raised 
Gregory  Nazianzen  to  the  patriarchal  chair  in  place  of  Demo- 
philus  (who  honestly  refused  to  renounce  his  heretical  convic- 
tion), and  drove  the  Arians,  after  their  forty  years'  reign,  out 
of  all  the  churches  of  the  capital. 

To  give  these  forcible  measures  the  sanction  of  law,  and  to 
restore  unity  in  the  church  of  the  whole  empire,  Theodosius 
called  the  second  ecumenical  council  at  Constantinople  in  !May, 
381.  This  council,  after  the  exit  of  the  thirty-six  Semi-Arian 
Macedonians  or  Pneumatomachi,  consisted  of  only  a  hundred 
and  fifty  bishops.  The  Latin  church  was  not  represented  at 
all.'  Meletius  (who  died  soon  after  the  opening),  Gregory 
Kazianzen,  and  after  his  resignation  Nectarius  of  Constanti- 
nople, successively  presided.  This  prefennent  of  the  patriarch 
of  Constantinople  before  the  patriarch  of  Alexandiia  is  ex- 
plained by  the  third  canon  of  the  council,  which  assigns  to  the 
bishop  of  new  Rome  the  first  rank  after  the  bishop  of  old 
Eome.  The  emperor  attended  the  opening  of  the  sessions,  and 
showed  the  bishops  all  honor. 

At  this  council  no  new  symbol  was  framed,  but  the  jS^icene  ^ 
Creed,  with  some  unessential  changes  and  an  important  addi- 
tion respecting  the  deity  of  the  Holy  Ghost  against  Macedoni- 
anism  or  Pneumatomachism,  was  adopted.'    In  this  improved 


*  In  the  earliest  Latin  translation  of  the  canons  of  this  council,  indeed,  three 
Roman  legates,  Paschasinus,  Lucentius,  and  Bonifacius,  are  recorded  among  the 
signers  (in  ifansi,  t.  vi.  p.  11*76),  but  from  an  evident  confusion  of  this  council  with 
the  fourth  ecumenical  of  451,  which  these  delegates  attended.  Comp.  Hefele,  ii.  p. 
3  and  393.  The  assertion  of  Baronius  that  in  reality  pope  Damasus  summoned  the 
council,  rests  likewise  on  a  mistake  of  the  first  coimcil  of  Constantinople  for  the 
second  in  382. 

^  This  modification  and  enlargement  of  the  Xicene  Creed  seems  not  to  have 
originated  with  the  second  ecumenical  council,  but  to  have  been  current  in  sub- 
stance about  ten  years  earlier.  For  Epiphanius,  in  his  Ancoratus,  which  was  com- 
posed in  374,  gives  two  similar  creeds,  which  were  then  already  in  use  in  the  East ; 
the  shorter  one  Uterally  agrees  with  that  of  Constantinople  (c.  119,  ed.  Migne,  tom. 
iii.  p.  231) ;  the  longer  one  (c.  120)  is  more  lengthy  on  the  Holy  Ghost ;  both  have 
the  anathema.    Hefele,  ii.  10,  overlooks  the  shorter  and  more  important  form. 


640  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-690. 

form  the  Nicene  Creed  has  been  received,  though  in  the  Greek 
church  without  the  later  Latin  addition :  filioque. 

In  the  seven  genuine  canons  of  this  -council  the  heresies  of 
the  Eunomians  or  Anomoeans,  of  the  Arians  or  Eudoxians,  of 
the  Semi- Arians  or  Pneumatoraachi,  of  the  Sabellians,  Marcel- 
lians,  and  Apollinarians,  were  condemned,  and  questions  of 
discipline  adjusted. 

The  emperor  ratified  the  decrees  of  the  council,  and  as 
early  as  July,  381,  enacted  the  law  that  all  churches  should 
be  given  up  to  bishops  who  believed  in  the  equal  divinity  of 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  who  stood  in 
church  fellowship  with  certain  designated  orthodox  bishops. 
The  public  worship  of  heretics  was  forbidden. 

Thus  Arianism  and  the  kindred  errors  were  forever  de- 
stroyed in  the  Roman  empire,  though  kindred  opinions  con- 
tinually reappear  as  isolated  cases  and  in  other  connections.' 

But  among  the  different  barbarian  peoples  of  the  "West, 
especially  in  Gaul  and  Spain,  who  had  received  Christianity 
from  the  Roman  empire  during  the  ascendency  of  Arianism, 
this  doctrine  was  perpetuated  two  centuries  longer :  among  the 
Goths  till  58^;  among  the  Suevi  in  Spain  till  560 ;  among  the 
Vandals  who  conquered  North  Africa  in  429  and  cruelly  per- 
secuted the  Catholics,  till  their  expulsion  by  Belisarius  in  530 ; 
among  the  Burgundians  till  their  incorporation  in  the  Frank 

'  John  Milton  and  Isaac  Newton  cannot  properly  be  termed  Arians.  Their  view 
of  the  relation  of  the  Son  to  the  Father  was  akin  to  that  of  Arius,  but  their  spirit 
and  their  system  of  ideas  were  totally  different.  Bishop  Bull's  gi-eat  work,  Defensio 
fidei  Nicaenae,  first  published  1685,  was  directed  against  Socinian  and  Arian  views 
which  obtained  in  England,  but  purely  with  historical  arguments  drawn  from  the  ante- 
Nicene  fathers.  Shortly  afterwards  the  high  Arian  view  was  revived  and  ably 
defended  with  exegetical,  patristic,  and  philosophical  arguments  by  Whiston, 
Whitby,  and  especially  by  Dr.  Samuel  Clarke  (died  1729),  in  his  treatise  on  the 
"Scripture  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity"  (1'712),  which  gave  rise  to  a  protracted  contro- 
versy, and  to  the  strongest  dialectical  defence  (though  broken  and  irregular  in 
method)  of  the  Nicene  doctrine  in  the  English  language  by  Dr.  Waterland.,  This 
trinitarian  controversy,  one  of  the  ablest  and  most  important  in  the  history  of 
Enghsh  theology,  is  very  briefly  and  superficially  touched  in  the  great  works  of 
Dr.  Baur  (vol.  iii.  p.  685  ff.)  and  Dorner  (vol.  ii.  p.  903  £F.) ;  but  the  defect  has 
been  supplied  by  Prof.  Patrick  Fairbaihn  in  an  Appendix  to  the  English  trans- 
lation of  Dorner's  History  of  Christology,  Divis.  Seed.  vol.  iii.  p.  SS'Z  ff. 


(i^u  ^-r^  ^'^  -  ,^.^M^.g.<^/''^— ^^  ^-^"^^ 


§   123.      EVIPOET   OF   THE   AEIAN   CONTROVEKST.  641 

empire  in  634,  and  among  the  Longobards  till  the  eltjse  of  the 

^i»^  centiirj.  ^^These    barbarians,   however,   held  Arianism      '^£,v€Wltr 

rather  through  accident  than  from  conviction,  and  scarcely 

knew  the  difference  between  it  and  the  orthodox  doctrine. 

Alaric,  the  first  conqueror  of  Rome ;  Genseric,  the  conqueror 

of  North  Africa;  Theodoric  the  Great,  king  of  Italy  and  hero 

of  the  Niebelungen  Lied,  were  Arians.     The  first  Teutonic 

translation   of  the  Bible  came  from  the  Arian  missionary 

Ulfilas.   'J 

§  123.     The  Theological  Principles  involved:  Irrvport  of  the 

Controversy. 

Here  should  be  compared,  of  the  works  before  mentioned,  especially 
Petavius  (torn,  sec,  De  sanctissima  Trinitate),  and  Mohlee  (Athana- 
sius,  third  book),  of  the  Romanists,  and  Baur,  Doener,  and  Voigt,  of 
the  Protestants. 

"We  pass  now  to  the  internal  history  of  the  Arian  conflict, 
the  development  of  the  antagonistic  ideas ;  first  marking  some 
general  points  of  view  from  which  the  subject  must  be  con- 
ceived. 

To  the  superficial  and  rationalistic  eye  this  great  struggle 
seems  a  metaphysical  subtilty  and  a  fruitless  logomachy, 
revolving  about  a  Greek  iota."  But  it  enters  into  the  heart  of 
Christianity,  and  must  necessarily  affect  in  a  greater  or  less 
degree  all  other  articles  of  faith.  The  diflerent  views  of  the 
contending  parties  concerning  the  relation  of  Christ  to  the 
Father  involved  the  general  question,  whether  Christianity  is 
truly  divine,  the  highest  revelation,  and  an  actual  redemption, 
or  merely  a  relative  truth,  which  may  be  suj)erseded  by  a  more         .  ^ 

perfect  revelation.  ^c<av  /r^/^<<-'  4^<-uvi-u^-^  c( Ct<^, ^y.,6d^  </e^end«^ 

Thus  the  controversy  is  conceived  even  by  Dr.  Baur,  who  '^'  fi^<*-^^'^ 
is  characterized  by  a  much  deeper  discernment  of  the  philo-    rf  CA-^^t*^^- 
sophical  and  historical  import  of  the  conflicts  in  the  history  of       "--^  ^  '"*    '.^ 
Christian  doctrine,  than  all  other  rationalistic  historians.  "The     ct'ui^'J.'^"^' 
main  question,"  he  says,  "was,  whether  Christianity  is   the 

c'                                      'Oy-o-oxaios — dfxoL-ovtnos — eTfpo-ov<nos. 
TOL.  II. 41 


642  THBKD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

highest  and  absolute  revelation  of  God,  and  such  that  by  it  in 
the  Son  of  God  the  self-existent  absolute  being  of  God  joins 
itself  to  man,  and  so  communicates  itself  that  man  through  the 
Son  becomes  truly  one  with  God,  and  comes  into  such  com- 
munit}^  of  essence  with  God,  as  makes  him  absolutely  certain 
of  ]3ardon  and  salvation.  From  this  point. of  view  Athanasius 
apprehended  the  gist  of  the  controversy,  always  finally  sum- 
ming up  all  his  objections  to  the  Arian  doctrine  with  the  chief 
argument,  that  the  whole  substance  of  Christianity,  all  reality 
of  redemption,  everything  which  makes  Christianity  the  per- 
fect salvation,  would  be  utterly  null  and  meaningless,  if  he 
who  is  supposed  to  unite  man  with  God  in  real  unity  of  being, 
were  not  himself  absolute  God,  or  of  one  substance  with  the 
absolute  God,  but  only  a  creature  among  creatures.  The  infi- 
nite chasm  which  separates  creature  from  Creator,  remains 
unfilled ;  there  is  nothing  really  mediatory  between  God  and 
man,  if  between  the  two  there  be  nothing  more  than  some 
created  and  finite  thing,  or  such  a  mediator  and  redeemer  as 
the  Arians  conceive  the  Son  of  God  in  his  essential  distinction 
from  God  :  not  begotten  from  the  essence  of  God  and  coeternal, 
but  created  out  of  nothing  and  arising  in  time.  Just  as  the 
distinctive  character  of  the  Athanasian  doctrine  lies  in  its 
efi'ort  to  conceive  the  relation  of  the  Father  and  Son,  and  in  it 
the  relation  of  God  and  man,  as  unity  and  community  of 
essence,  the  Arian  doctrine  on  the  contrary  has  the  opposite 
aim  of  a  separation  by  which,  first  Father  and  Son,  and  then 
God  and  man,  are  placed  in  the  abstract  opposition  of  infinite 
and  finite.  While,  therefore,  according  to  Athanasius,  Chris- 
tianity is  the  religion  of  the  unity  of  God  and  man,  according 
to  Arius  the  essence  of  the  Christian  revelation  can  consist 
only  in  man's  becoming  conscious  of  the  difference  which 
separates  him,  with  all  the  finite,  from  the  absolute  being  of 
God,  What  value,  however,  one  must  ask,  has  such  a  Chris- 
tianity, when,  instead  of  bringing  man  nearer  to  God,  it  only 
fixes  the  chasm  between  God  and  man  ? "  ' 

Arianism  was  a  religious  political  war  against  the  spirit  of 
the  Christian  revelation  by  the  spirit  of  the  world,  which,  after 

'  Die  christliche  Kirche  voic  4-6ten  Jahrhundert,  1859,  p.  97  sq. 


1 


§  123.   EMPORT  OF  THE  AEIAN  CONTKOVERSY.      643 

having  persecuted  the  church  three  hundred  years  from  with- 
out, sought  under  the  Christian  name  to  reduce  her  by  degrad- 
ing Christ  to  the  category  of  the  temporal  and  the  created,  and 
Christianity  to  the  level  of  natural  religion.  It  substituted 
for  a  truly  divine  Redeemer,  a  created  demigod,  an  elevated 
Hercules.  Arianism  proceeded  from  human  reason,  Athana- 
sianism  from  divine  revelation  ;  and  each  used  the  other  source 
of  knowledge  as  a  subordinate  and  tributary  factor.  The  for- 
mer was  deistic  and  rationalistic,  the  latter  theistic  and  supcr- 
naturahstic,  in  spirit  and  effect.  The  one  made  reasonableness, 
the  other  agreement  with  Scripture,  the  criterion  of  truth.  In 
the  one  the  intellectual  interest,  in  the  other  the  moral  and 
religious,  was  the  motive  principle.  Yet  Athanasius  was  at 
the  same  time  a  much  deeper  and  abler  thinker  than  Arius, 
who  dealt  in  barren  deductions  of  reason  and  dialectic  formu- 

las.7 

In  close  connection  with  this  stood  another  distinction. 
Arianism  associated  itself  with  the  secular  political  power  and 
the  court  party ;  ^  it  represented  the  imperio-papal  principle, 
and  the  time  of  its  prevalence  under  Constantius  was  an 
uninteiTupted  season  of  the  most  arbitrary  and  violent  en- 
croachments of  the  state  upon  the  rights  of  the  chm-ch. 
Athanasius,  on  the  contrary,  who  was  so  often  deposed  by  the 
emperor,  and  who  uttered  himself  so  boldly  respecting  Con- 
stantius, is  the  personal  representative  not  only  of  orthodoxy, 
but  also  of  the  independence  of  the  church  with  reference  to 

'  Baur,  Newman  (The  Arians,  p.  17),  and  others  put  Arianism  into  connection 
with  the  Aristotelian  philosophy,  Athanasianism  with  the  Platonic ;  while  Petavius, 
Ritter,  to  some  extent  also  Voigt  (1.  c.  p.  194),  and  others  exactly  reverse  the  rela- 
tion, and  derive  the  Arian  idea  of  God  from  Platonism  and  Neo-Platonism.  This 
contrariety  of  opinion  itself  proves  that  such  a  comparison  is  rather  confusing  than 
helpful.  The  empirical,  rational,  logical  tendency  of  Arianism  is,  to  be  sure,  more 
Aristotelian  than  Platonic ;  and  so  far  Baur  is  right.  But  the  Aristotelian  logic  and 
dialectics  may  be  used  equally  well  in  the  service  of  Catholic  orthodoxy,  as  they 
were  in  fact  in  the  mediseval  scholasticism  ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Platonic 
idealism,  which  was  to  Justin,  Origen,  and  Augustine,  a  bridge  to  faith,  may  lead  into 
all  kinds  of  Gnostic  and  mystic  error.  All  depends  on  making  revelation  and  faith,  or 
philosophy  and  reason,  the  startmg-point  and  the  ruling  power  of  the  theological 
system.  Comp.  also  the  observations  of  Dr.  Dorner  against  Dr.  Baur,  in  his  Ent- 
wicklungfgesch.  der  Christologie,  vol.  i.  p.  859,  note. 


644:  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

tlie  secular  power,  and  in  this  respect  a  precursor  of  Gregory 
YlL  in  liis  contest  with  the  German  imperialism. 

While  Arianism  bent  to  the  changing  politics  of  the  court 
party,  and  fell  into  diverse  schools  and  sects  the  moment  it 
lost  the  imperial  support,  the  Nicene  faith,  like  its  great  cham- 
pion Athanasius,  remained  under  all  outward  changes  of 
fortune  true  to  itself,  and  made  its  mighty  advance  only  by 
legitimate  growth  outward  from  within.  Athanasius  makes 
no  distinction  at  all  between  the  various  shades  of  Arians 
and  Semi- Arians,  but  throws  them  all  into  the  same  category 
of  enemies  of  the  catholic  faith.* 


§  124.     Arianisin. 
The  doctrine  of  the  Arians,  or  Eusebians,  Aetians,  Euno- 

4 

'  I  cannot  refrain  from  quoting  the  striking  judgment  of  George  Bancroft, 
once  a  Unitarian  preaclier,  on  the  import  of  the  Arian  controversy  and  the  vast 
influence  of  the  Athanasian  doctrine  on  the  onward  march  of  true  Christian  civiliza- 
tion. "In  vain,"  says  he  in  his  address  on  the  Progress  of  the  Human  Race, 
delivered  before  the  New  York  Historical  Society  in  1854,  p.  23  f.,  "did  restless 
pride,  as  that  of  Arius,  seek  to  paganize  Christianity  and  make  it  the  ally  of  impe- 
rial despotism ;  to  prefer  a  belief  resting  on  authority  and  unsupported  by  an  inward 
witness,  over  the  clear  revelation  of  which  the  miUions  might  see  and  feel  and  know 
the  divine  glory ;  to  substitute  the  conception,  framed  after  the  pattern  of  heathen- 
ism, of  an  agent,  superhuman  yet  finite,  for  faith  in  the  ever  continuing  presence  of 
God  with  man ;  to  wrong  the  greatness  and  sanctity  of  the  Spirit  of  God  by  repre- 
senting it  as  a  birth  of  time.  Against  these  attempts  to  subordinate  the  enfranchis- 
ing virtue  of  truth  to  false  worship  and  to  arbitrary  power  reason  asserted  its  su- 
premacy, and  the  party  of  superstition  was  driven  from  the  field.  Then  mooned 
Ashtaroth  was  echpsed  and  Osiris  was  seen  no  more  in  Mcmphian  grove;  then 
might  have  been  heard  the  crash  of  the  falling  temples  of  Polytheism ;  and  instead 
of  them,  came  that  harmony  which  holds  Heaven  and  Earth  in  happiest  union. 
Amid  the  deep  sorrows  of  humanity  during  the  sad  conflict  which  was  protracted 
through  centuries  for  the  overthrow  of  the  past  and  the  reconstruction  of  society, 
the  consciousness  of  an  incarnate  God  carried  peace  into  the  bosom  of  mankind. 
That  faith  emancipated  the  slave,  broke  the  bondage  of  woman,  redeemed  the  cap- 
tive, elevated  the  low,  lifted  up  the  oppressed,  consoled  the  wretched,  inspired  aUke 
the  heroes  of  thought  and  the  countless  masses.  The  down-trodden  nations  clung 
to  it  as  to  the  certainty  of  their  future  emancipation ;  and  it  so  filled  the  heart  of 
the  greatest  poet  of  the  Middle  Ages — perhaps  the  greatest  poet  of  all  time — that 
he  had  no  prayer  so  earnest  as  to  behold  in  the  profound  and  clear  substance  of  the 
eternal  light,  that  circling  of  reflected  glory  which  showed  the  image  of  man." 


§   124.      ARIANISM.  645 

mians,  as  they  were  called  after  their  later  leaders,  or  Exukou- 
tians,  Heteroousiasts,  and  Anomoeans,  as  they  were  named 
from  their  characteristic  terms,  is  in  substance  as  follows  : 

The  Father  alone  is  God  ;  therefore  he  alone  is  unbegotten, 
eternal,  wise,  good,  and  unchangeable,  and  he  is  separated  by 
an  infinite  chasm  from  the  world.  He  cannot  create  the  world 
directly,  but  only  through  an  agent,  the  Logos.  The  Son  of 
God  is  pre-existent,'  before  all  creatures,  and  above  all  crea- 
tures, a  middle  being  between  God  and  the  world,  the  creator 
of  the  world,  the  perfect  image  of  the  Father,  and  the  execu- 
tor of  his  thoughts,  and  thus  capable  of  being  called  in  a 
metaphorical  sense  God,  and  Logos,  and  "Wisdom.''  But  on 
the  other  hand,  he  himself  is  a  creature,  that  is  to  say,  the 
first  creation  of  God,  through  whom  the  Father  called  other 
creatures  into  existence  ;  he  was  created  out  of  nothing  ^  (not 
out  of  the  essence  of  God)  by  the  will  of  the  Father  before  all 
conceivable  time  ;  he  is  therefore  not  eternal,  but  had  a 
beginning,  and  there  was  a  time  when  he  was  not.* 

Arianism  thus  rises  far  above  Ebionism,  Socinianism, 
deism,  and  rationalism,  in  maintaining  the  personal  pre-exist- 
ence  of  the  Son  before  all  worlds,  which  were  his  creation  ; 
but  it  agrees  with  those  systems  in  lowering  the  Son  to  the 
sphere  of  the  created,  which  of  course  includes  the  idea  of 
temporalness  and  finiteness.     It  at  first   ascribed  to  him  the  *"''^4 

predicate  of  unchangeableness  also,^  but  afterwards  subjected 
him  to  the  vicissitudes  of  created  being.^  This  contradiction, 
however,  is  solved,  if  need  be,  by  the  distinction  between  moral 
and  physical  unchangeableness ;  the  Son  is  in  his  nature 
{^v(7€i)  changeable,  but  remains  good  (/cwXo?)  by  a  free  act  of 
his  will.  Arius,  after  having  once  robbed  the  Son  of  divine 
essence,'  could  not  consistently  allow  him  any  divine  attribute 
in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word ;  he  limited  his  duration,  his 

Uph  xpovuiv  Koi  alitivuv. 

&e6i,  \6yos,  (Tocpia, 
^  Uoi-r^fxa,  /cnVjua  e|  ouk  uvtoiv.     Hence  the  name  Exukontians. 

ApxV  eXf — ovK  ■fju  vplv  yevvr^Snj,  fJTOi  KTicbrj — ^v  irore  ore  ovk  ^v. 
AvaWoictiTos,  &TpeTrTOS  b  vl6s. 

TpeTTToi  (pv(rei  iis  to.  KrlanaTa. 
''  Oiicrta. 


646  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D,    311-590. 

power,  and  liis  knowledge,  and  expressly  asserted  that  the  Son 
docs  not  perfectly  know  the  Father,  and  therefore  cannot  per- 
fectly reveal  him.  The  Son  is  essentially  distinct  from  the 
Father,'  and — as  Aetius  and  Eimomius  afterward  more  strono-- 
ly  expressed  it — nnlike  the  Father ;  ^  and  this  dissimilarity 
was  by  some  extended  to  all  moral  and  metaphysical  attribntes 
and  conditions.^  The  dogma  of  the  essential  deity  of  Christ 
seemed  to  Arius  to  lead  of  necessity  to  Sabellianism  or  to  the 
Gnostic  dreams  of  emanation.  As  to  the  humanity  of  Christ, 
Arius  ascribed  to  him  only  a  human  body,  but  not  a  rational 
soul,  and  on  this  point  Apollinarius  came  to  the  same  conclusion, 
though  from  orthodox  premises,  and  with  the  intention  of  saving 
the  unity  of  the  divine  personality  of  Christ. 

The  later  develo23ment  of  Arianism  brought  out  nothing 
really  new,  but  rather  revealed  many  inconsistencies  and 
contradictions.  Thus,  for  example,  Eunomius,  to  whom  clear- 
ness was  the  measure  of  truth,  maintained  that  revelation  has 
made  everything  clear,  and  man  can  perfectly  know  God; 
while  Arius  denied  even  to  the  Son  the  perfect  knowledge  of 
God  or  of  himself.  The  negative  and  rationalistic  element 
came  forth  in  ever  greater  prominence,  and  the  controversy 
became  a  metaphysical  war,  destitute  of  all  deep  religious 
>y  spirit.     The  eighteen   formulas  of  faith  which  Arianism  and 

AjtOU  Semi- Arianism  produced  between  the  councils  of  Nic/^  and 
Constantinople,  are  leaves  without  blossoms,  and  branches 
without  fruit.  The  natural  course  of  the  Arian  heresy  is 
downward,  through  the  stage  of  Socinianism,  into  the  rational- 
-^Z  ism  which  sees  in  Christ  a  mere  man,  the  chief  of  his  kind.^ 

To  pass  now  to  the  arguments  used  for  and  against  this 
error : 

1.  The  Arians  drew  their  exegetical  proofs  from  the  passages 

of  Scripture  which  seem  to  place  Christ  in  any  way  in  the 

^       category  of  that  which  is  created/  or  ascribe  to  the  incarnate 

'   'Erepooucrios  T(f  ■warpi.  ^ 

•  'AySfiotos  KixT  oiKTiai/.     Ilcnce  the  name  'AcJiUoioi,  Anomoeaus. 
^  'Avo/xoios  Kara  Travra. 
S"  /  Such  as  Prov.  viii.  22-25  (comp.  Sir.  i.  4 ;  xxiv.  8  f.),  where  personified  Wis- 

dom, i.  e.,  the  Logos,  says  (according  to  the  Septuagint):  Kvpios  eKna-iv  /.le  [Heb. 


§    121.      AKIA2JISM.  647 

(not  the  pre-temporal,  divine)  Logos  growth,  lack  of  knowl- 
edge, weariness,  sorrow,  and  other  changing  human  affec- 
tions and  states  of  mind,'  or  teach  a  subordination  of  the  Son 
to  the  Father.^ 

Athanasius  disposes  of  these  arguments  somewhat  too 
easily,  by  referring  the  passages  exclusively  to  the  humcm  side 
of  the  person  of  Jesus,  When,  for  example,  the  Lord  says  he  • 
knows  not  the  day  nor  the  hour  of  the  judgment,  this  is 
due  only  to  his  human  nature.  For  how  should  the  Lord  of 
heaven  and  earth,  who  made  days  and  hours,  not  know  them  ! 
He  accuses  the  Arians  of  the  Jewish  coBceit,  that  divine  and 
human  are  incompatible.  The  Jews  say :  How  could  Christ, 
if  he  were  God,  become  man,  and  die  on  the  cross?  The 
Arians  say :  How  can  Christ,  who  was  man,  be  at  the  same 
time  God  ?  "We,  says  Athanasius,  are  Christians ;  we  do  not 
stone  Christ  when  he  asserts  his  eternal  Godhead,  nor  are  we 
oflfended  in  him  when  he  speaks  to  us  in  the  language  of 

''ISSj? ,  Vulg.  possedit  me]  apxhv  d'5wv  avrov  ejs  ipya  avrov  •  irpb  tov  aluivos  e^eixi\icii- 
aev  ne,  k.t.X.  This  passage  seemed  clearly  to  prove  the  two  propositions  of  Arius, 
that  the  Father  created  the  Son;  and  that  he  created  him  for  the  purpose  of  creating 
the  world  through  hira  {th  ipya  avrov).  Acts  ii.  36 :  "Otj  koI  Kvpiov  avrhv  Kal 
Xpiffrhv  iiroir](reu  6  Qeos.  Heb.  i.  4:  KpfirTuv  yev Sfievo s  tSov  ayytKoov. 
Heb.  iii.  2:  IIicrTb;'  ovra  rai  tto  iri  cr  av  r  i  avrSv.  John  1.  14:  'O  \6yos  ffdp^  iyi- 
viTo.  Phil.  ii.  7-9.  The  last  two  passages  are  of  course  wholly  inapposite,  as 
they  treat  of  the  incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God,  not  of  his  pre-temporal  existence 
and  essence.  Heb.  i.  4  refers  to  the  exaltation  of  the  God-Man.  Most  plausible  of 
all  is  the  famous  passage:  TrpcoTiiroKos  irdaris  /cTiVeccy,  Col.  i.  15,  from  which  the 
Arians  inferred  that  Christ  himself  is  a  ktio-ij  of  God,  to  wit,  the  first  creature  of  all. 
But  TTpaiTor  0  Kos  is  not  equivalent  to  irpteroKr  i<tt  os  ov  -npanoTrXacn  os:  on  the 
contrary,  Christ  is  by  this  very  term  distinguished  from  the  creation,  and  described 
a3  the  Author,  Upholder,  and  End  of  the  creation.  A  creature  cannot  possibly  be 
the  source  of  life  for  all  creatures.  The  meaning  of  the  expression,  therefore,  is : 
born  before  every  creature,  i.  e.,  before  anj'thing  was  made.  The  text  indicates  the 
distinction  between  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son  from  the  essence  of  the  Father, 
and  the  temporal  creation  of  the  world  out  of  nothing  by  the  Son.  Yet  there  is  a 
difference  between  /xovoyivris  and  iTpan6Toiios,  which  Athanasius  himself  makes :  the 
former  referring  to  the  relation  of  the  Son  to  the  Father,  the  latter,  to  his  relation 
to  the  world. 

'  Such  as  Luke  ii.  52 ;   Heb.  v.  8,  9 ;    John  xii.  21,  28 ;  Matt.  xxvi.  39 ;  Mark 
xiii^2;  &c/> 

O  '  E.  (/.,  John  xiv.  28  :  'O  -rcar-np  fxel^wv  /xov  (any.     This  passage  also  refers  not 

to  the  pre-existent  state  of  Christ,  but  to  the  state  of  humiliation  of  the  God-Man.  r^ 


648  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

human  poverty.  But  it  is  the  peculiar  doctrine  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture to  declare  everywhere  a  double  thing  of  Christ :  that  he, 
as  Logos  and  image  of  the  Father,  was  ever  truly  divine,  and 
that  he  afterwards  became  man  for  our  salvation.  When  Atha- 
nasius  cannot  refer  such  terms  as  "  made,"  "  created,"  "  be- 
came," to  the  human  nature,  he  takes  them  figuratively  for 
"  testified,"  "  constituted,"  "  demonstrated."  ' 

As  positive  exegetical  proofs  against  Arianism,  Athanasius 
cites  almost  all  the  familiar  proof-texts  which  ascribe  to  Christ 
divine  names,  divine  attributes,  divine  works,  and  divine  dig- 
nity, and  which  it  is  unnecessary  here  to  mention  in  detail. 

Of  course  his  exegesis,  as  well  as  that  of  the  fathers  in 
general,  when  viewed  from  the  level  of  the  modern  grammati- 
cal, historical,  and  critical  method,  contains  a  great  deal  of 
allegorizing  caprice  and  fancy  and  sophistical  subtilty.  But 
it  is  in  general  far  more  profound  and  true  than  tlie  heretical. 

2.  The  theological  arguments  for  Arianism  were  predomi- 
nantly negative  and  rationalizing.  The  amount  of  them  is, 
that  the  opposite  view  is  unreasonable,  is  irreconcilable  with 
strict  monotheism  and  the  dignity  of  God,  and  leads  to  Sabel- 
lian  or  Gnostic  errors.  It  is  true,  Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  one  of 
the  most  zealous  advocates  of  the  Nicene  homoousianism,  fell 
into  the  Sabellian  denial  of  the  tri-personality,^  but  most  of  the 
Nicene  fathers  steered  with  unerring  tact  between  the  Scylla 
of  Sabelliauism,  and  the  Charybdis  of  Tritheism. 

Athanasius  met  the  theological  objections  of  the  Arians 
with  overwhelming  dialectical  skill,  and  exposed  the  internal 

^  The  €KTi(re  and  i^e/juXiaiae  in  Prov.  viii.  22  fifl,  on  which  the  Arians  laid 
special  stress,  and  of  which  Athanasius  treats  quite  at  large  in  his  second  oration 
against  the  Arians,  he  refers  not  to  the  essence  of  the  Logos  (with  whom  the  croipia 
was  by  both  parties  identified),  but  to  the  incarnation  of  the  Logos  and  to  the 
renovation  of  our  race  through  him:  appealing  to  Eph.  ii.  10:  "We  are  his  work- 
manship, created  in  Christ  Jesus  unto  good  works."  As  to  the  far  more  important 
passage  in  Col.  i.  15,  Athanasius  gives  substantially  the  correct  interpretation  in  his 
Expositio  fidei,  cap.  3  (ed.  Bened.  torn.  i.  101),  where  he  says :  irpurSTOKov  e'nrciiv 
[noCAos]  5rj\o7  fJLT]  iJfai  avrhv  KTifffxa,  aWa  yepvTifia  tov  irarpos'  ^ivov  yap  iirl 
T^j  i&eoTTjTOS  ahrov  rb  Xiyea^ai  KTiff/ia.  Ta  yap  Traura  iKTiffbrjaav  virh  rod  irarphi 
Sia  TOV  vlov,  6  Se  vlhs  fiSvos  iic  tov  irarphs  aXSiws  tyevvrj^ri  •  5ib  ttpcutStokos  tan 
irocTjs  /CTtcewy  6  ®ehs  \6yo9,  &TpcirTos  i^  aTpeiTTov, 

^  Comp.  on  Marcellus  of  Ancyra  below,  §  126. 


§    125.       SEMI-AEIAOTSM.  649 

• 

contradictions  and  philosophical  absurdities  of  their  positions. 
Arianism  teaches  two  gods,  an  uncreated  and  a  created,  a  su- 
preme and  a  secondary  god,  and  thus  far  relapses  into  heathen 
polytheism.  It  holds  Christ  to  be  a  mere  creature,  and  yet 
the  creator  of  the  world  ;  as  if  a  creature  could  be  the  source 
of  life,  the  origin  and  the  end  of  all  creatures !  It  ascribes  to 
Christ  a  pre-mundane  existence,  but  denies  him  eternity,  while 
yet  time  belongs  to  the  idea  of  the  world,  and  is  created  only 
therewith,'  so  that  before  the  world  there  was  nothing*but  eter- 
nity. It  supposes  a  time  before  the  creation  of  the  pre-existent 
Christ;  thus  involving  God  himself  in  the  notion  of  time; 
which  contradicts  the  absolute  being  of  God.  It  asserts  the 
unchangeableness  of  God,  but  denies,  with  the  eternal  genera- 
tion of  the  Son,  also  the  eternal  Fatherhood ;  thus  assuming 
after  all  a  very  essential  change  in  God.''  Athanasius  charges 
the  Arians  with  dualism  and  heathenism,  and  he  accuses  them 
of  destroying  the  whole  doctrine  of  salvation.  For  if  the  Son 
is  a  creature,  man  remains  still  separated,  as  before,  from  God  ; 
no  creature  can  redeem  other  creatures,  and  unite  them  with 
God.  If  Christ  is  not  divine,  much  less  can  we  be  partakers 
of  the  divine  nature  and  children  of  God.^ 


§  125.     Semi-Arianism. 

The  Semi- Arians,*  or,  as  they  are  called,  the  Homoiousi- 
asts,^  wavered  in  theory   and  conduct   between   the  Nicene 

*  Mundus  non  factus  est  in  tempore,  sed  cum  tempore,  says  Augustine,  although 
I  camiot  just  now  lay  my  hand  on  the  passage.  Time  is  the  successional  form  of 
existence  of  all  created  things.  Now  Arius  might  indeed  have  said :  Time  arose 
with  the  Son  as  the  first  creature.  This,  however,  he  did  not  say,  Ijut  put  a  time 
before  the  Son. 

'  Of  less  weight  is  the  objection,  which  was  raised  by  Alexander  of  Alexandria: 
Suice  the  Son  is  the  Logos,  the  Arian  God  must  have  been,  until  the  creation  of  the 
Son,  &A.070S,  a  being  without  reason. 

'  Comp.  the  second  Oration  against  the  Arians,  cap.  69  ff. 

*  'H/uiapeiof. 

'  'OfjLoiovcrtaaroi,  The  name  Eusebians  is  used  of  the  Arians  and  Semi-Arians, 
who  both  for  a  time  made  common  cause,  as  a  political  party  under  the  lead  of 
Eusebius  of  Xicomedia  (not  of  Cassarea),  against  the  Athanasians  and  Xicenes. 


650  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

orthodoxy  and  the  Arian  heresy.  Their  doctrine  makes  the 
impression,  not  of  an  internal  reconciliation  of  opposites 
which  in  fact  were  irreconcilable,  but  of  diplomatic  evasion, 
temporizing  compromise,  flat,  half  and  hal^  juste  milieu.  They 
had  a  strong  footing  in  the  subordination  of  most  of  the  ante- 
ISTicene  fathers ;  but  now  the  time  for  clear  and  definite  de- 
cision had  come. 

Their  doctrine  is  contained  in  the  confession  which  was 
proposed*  to  the  council  of  Nicsea  by  Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  but 
rejected,  and  in  the  symbols  of  the  councils  of  Antioch  and 
Sirmium  from  340  to  360.  Theologically  they  were  best 
represented  first  by  Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  who  adliered  more 
closely  to  his  admired  Origen,  and  later  by  Cyril  of  Jerusalem, 
who  approached  nearer  the  orthodoxy  of  the  ISTicene  party. 

The  signal  term  of  Semi-Arianism  is  homoi-ousion;  in  dis- 
tinction from  homo-ousion  and  hetero-ousion.  The  system 
teaches  that  Chi'ist  is  not  a  creature,  but  co-eternal  with  the 
Father,  though  not  of  the  same,  but  only  of  like  essence,  and 
subordinate  to  him.  It  agrees  with  the  Nicene  creed  in  assert- 
ing the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son,  and  in  denying  that  he 
was  a  created  being  ;  while,  with  Arianism,  it  denies  the  iden- 
tity of  essence.  Hence  it  satisfied  neither  of  the  opposite  par- 
ties, and  was  charged  by  both  with  logical  incoherence.  Atha- 
nasius  and  his  friends  held,  against  the  Semi-Arians,  that  like 
attributes  and  relations  might  be  spoken  of,  but  not  like  essences 
or  substances  ;  these  are  either  identical  or  different.  It  may 
be  said  of  one  man  that  he  is  like  another,  not  in  respect  of 
substance,  but  in  respect  of  his  exterior  and  form.  If  the 
Son,  as  the  Semi-Arians  admit,  is  of  the  essence  of  the  Father, 
he  must  be  also  of  the  same  essence.  The  Arians  argued : 
There  is  no  middle  being  between  created  and  uncreated  being ; 
if  God  the  Father  alone  is  uncreated,  everything  out  of  him, 
including  the  Son,  is  created,  and  consequently  of  different 
essence,  and  unlike  him. 

Thus  pressed  from  both  sides,  Semi-Arianism  could  not 
long  withstand  ;  and  even  before  the  council  of  Constantinople 
it  passed  over,  in  the  main,  to  the  camp  of  orthodoxy." 

*  Bull  judges  Semi-Arianism  very  contemptuously.      "  Semi-Arianus,"  saya  he 


Vi,.^^^si^  ■•  X^'*^-  - 


^^::^-^^  ^^^ 


126.      EEVIVED   SABELLIANISM.  651 


§  126.     Revived  Sdbellianism.     Marcellus  and  Photinus. 

I.  EusEBius  O^sAE. :  Two  books  contra  Marcellum  {Kara  MapKeXkov),  and 
three  books  De  ecclesiastica  theologia  (after  his  Demonstratio  evang.). 
/^  A       Hilaet:   Fragmenta,  1-3.     Basil  the  Geeat:    Epist.  52.     Epipha-  ^—  ., 

^'^-      Nius:  Ha^res.  72.  ^  Eettbeeg  :  Marcelliana,  r&ott.  1794  (a  collection  j^^'^''"*'^ 
-- "  "         of  the  Fragments  of  Marcellus).  ^*T^/^^ 

n.  Montfauoon:  Diatribe  de  causa  Marcelli  Ancyr.  (in  Collect,  nova  Patr.   j,,/^;^j^j 
torn.  ii.  Par.  1707).    Klose  :    Geschichte  u.  Lehre  des  Marcellus  u. 
Photinus.    Hamb.  1837.     Mohlee  :  Athanasius  der  Gr.  Buch  iv.  p.  318 
sqq.  (aiming  to  vindicate  Marcellus,  as  ISTeander  also  does).     Batje  :  1.  c. 
vol.  i.  pp.  525-558.       Doenee:    1.  c.  i.  pp.  864-882.      (Both   against 

the  orthodoxy  of  Marcellus.)    Hefele:    Oonciliengesch.  i.  456  sq.  et   j 

passim.   Willenb^eg  :  Ueber  die  Orthodoxie  des  Marc^yAJ^tinster,  1859. y/       " 

Before  we  pass  to  tlie  exhibition  of  tlie  ortliodox  doctrine, 
we  must  notice  a  trinitarian  error  wliich  arose  in  the  course  of 
the  controversy  from  an  excess  of  zeal  against  the  Arian  sub-  > . 

ordination,  and  forms  the  opposite  extreme^W-  i-n  ^K^tW^ ,  ^^»^  ^^- 

Makcelltts,  bishop  of  Ancyra  in  Galatia,  a  friend  of  Atha-  ^^l^^  ■   7 
nasius,  and  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  Nicene  party,  in  a  large  ^j.     >^  ^^ 
controversial  work  written  soon  after  the  council  of  Nicsea  ^^  Jjri^ 
against  Arianism  and  Semi-Arianism,  so  pushed  the  doctrine  <i\tJi  ^tiru 
of  the  consubstantiality  of  Christ  that  he  impaired  the  person-   ^'ftz  fm».it 
al  distinction  of  Father  and  Son,  and,  at  least  in  phraseology,   f^irCtujuf . 
fell  into  a  refined  form  of  Sabellianism.'     To  save  the  full  <^ 

divinity  of  Christ  and  his  equality  with  the  Father,  he  denied 
his  hypostatical  pre-existence.  As  to  the  orthodoxy  of  Mar- 
cellus, however,  the  East  and  the  West  were  divided,  and  the 
diversity  continues  even  among  modern  scholars.  A  Semi- 
Arian  council  in  Constantinople,  A.  D.  335,  deposed  him,  and 
intrusted  Eusebius  of  Csesarea  with  the  refutation  of  his  work  ; 

(L  iv.  4,  8,  vol.  V.  pars  ii.  p.  779),  "et  semi-Deus,  et  semi-creatura  periude  monstra 
et  portenta  sunt,  quae  sani  et  pii  omnes  merito  exhorrent.  Filius  Dei  aut  varus 
omnino  Deus,  aut  mera  creatura  statuatur  necesse  est ;  aeternse  veritatis  axioma  est, 
inter  Deum  et  creaturam,  inter  non  factum  et  factum,  medium  esse  nihil."  Quite 
similarly  Waterland :  A  Defence  of  some  Queries  relating  to  Dr.  Clarke's  Scheme  of 
the  Holy  Trinity,  Works,  vol.  i.  p.  404. 

*  In  his  work  ttmI  viroTayrji,  De  subjectione  Domini  Christi,  founded  on  1  Cor. 
XV.  28,  J't-'^i  c/tt^-c*^  «iu.  ■f^AJi'-icUffJL'^  ^A*.  ^vv^^vwA-i  o/  &i.4t>vt*i  <».  a  cuh*^' 


652  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

wHle,  on  the  contraiy,  pope  Julius  of  Rome  aud  the  orthodox 
council  of  Sardica  (343),  blinded  by  his  equivocal  declarations, 
his  former  services,  and  his  close  connection  with  Athanasius, 
protected  his  orthodoxy  and  restored  him  to  his  bishopric. 
The  counter-synod  of  Philippopolis,  however,  confirmed  the 
condemnation.  Finally  even  Athanasius,  who  elsewhere 
always  speaks  of  him  with  great  respect,  is  said  to  have  de- 
clared against  him.'  The  council  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  381, 
declared  even  the  baptism  of  the  Marcellians  and  Photiniaus 
invalid.^ 

Marcellus  wished  to  hold  fast  the  true  deity  of  Christ 
0  without  falling  under  the  charge  of  subordinatilnism.  He 
granted  tlje, Brians  right  in  their  assertion  that  the  Nicene 
doctrine  of  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son  involves  the  sub- 
ordination of  the  Son,  aud  is  incompatible  with  his  own  eter- 
nity. For  this  reason  he  entirely  gave  up  this  doctrine,  and 
referred  the  expressions  :  Son^  image,  firstborn,  begotten,  not 
to  the  eternal  metaphysical  relation,  but  to  the  incarnation. 
He  thus  made  a  rigid  separation  between  Logos  and  Son, 
and  this  is  the  irpcoTov  -v/reuSo?  of  this  system.  Before  the  in- 
carnation there  was,  he  taught,  no  Son  of  God,  but  only  a 
Logos,  and  by  that  he  imderstood, — at  least  so  he  is  represented 
by  Eusebius, — an  impersonal  power,  a  reason  inherent  in  God, 
inseparable  from  him,  eternal,  uniegotten,  after  the  analogy  of 
reason  in  man.  Tliis  Logos  was  silent  (therefore  without  word) 
in  God  before  the  creation  of  the  world,  but  then  went  forth 
out  of  God  as  the  creative  word  and  power,  the  SpaariKT) 
ivipyeia  irpd^eco^  of  God  (not  as  a  hypostasis).  This  power  is 
the  principle  of  creation,  and  culminates  in  the  incarnation, 
but  after  finishing  the  work  of  redemption  returns  again  into 
the  repose  of  God.  The  Son,  after  completing  the  work  of  re- 
demption, resigns  his  kingdom  to  the  Father,  and  rests  again  in 
God  as  in  the  beginning.     The  sonship,  therefore,  is  only  a 

'  Hilary,  Fragm.  ii.  n.  21  (p.  1299,  ed.  Bened.),  states  that  Athanasius  as  early 
as  349  renounced  church  fellowship  with  Marcellus. 

"  These  are  meant  by  the  ol  airh  t^j  raXaruv  xt^paj  ipx^neyoi  in  the  Vth  canon 
of  the  second  ecumenical  council.  Marcellus  and  Photinus  were  both  of  Ancyra  in 
Galatia.     Comp.  Hefele,  Conciliengeschichtc,  toI.  ii.  p.  26. 


I 


§    126.      REVITED   8AEELLIANISM.  653 

temporary  state,  -wliich  begins  with  the  human  advent  of  Christ, 
and  is  at  last  promoted  or  glorified  into  Godhead.  Marcelliis 
reaches  not  a  real  God-Man,  but  only  an  extraordinary  dy- 
namical indwelhng  of  the  divine  power  in  the  man  Jesus.  In 
this  respect  the  charge  of  Samosatenism,  which  the  council 
of  Constantinople  in  335  brought  against  him,  has  a  certain 
justice,  though  he  started  from  premises  entirely  different  from 
those  of  Paul  of  Samosata.'  His  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
and  of  the  Trinity  is  to  a  corresponding  degree  unsatisfactory. 
He  speaks,  indeed,  of  an  extension  of  the  indivisible  divine 
monad  into  a  triad,  but  in  the  Sabellian  sense,  and  denies  the 
three  hypostases  or  persons.^ 

PnoTiNTrs,  first  a  deacon  at  Ancyra,  then  bishop  of  Sirmium 
in  Pannonia,  went  still  further  than  his  preceptor  Marcellus. 
He  likewise  started  with  a  strict  distinction  between  the  notion 
of  Logos  and  Son,''  rejected  the  idea  of  eternal  generation,  and 
made  the  divine  in  Christ  an  impersonal  power  of  God.  But 
while  Marcellus,  from  the  Sabellian  point  of  view,  identified 
the  Son  with  the  Logos  as  to  essence,  and  transferred  to  him 
the  divine  predicates  attaching  to  the  Logos,  Photinus,  on  the 
contrary,  quite  like  Paul  of  Samosata,  made  Jesus  rise  on  the 
basis  of  his  human  nature,  by  a  course  of  moral  improvement 
and  moral  merit,  to  the  divine  dignity,  so  that  the  divine  in 
him  is  a  thing  of  gi'owth. 

Hence  Photinus  was  condemned  as  a  heretic  by  several 
councils  in  the  East  and  in  the  "West,  beginning  with  the  Semi- 
Arian  council  at  Antioch  in  344.     He  died  in  exile  in  366.' 

'  Domer  (1.  c.  880  sq.)  asserts  of  Marcellus,  that  his  Sabellianism  ran  out  to  a  f-x^  C^  ""^ 

sort  of  Ebionitism.  '  ^e^oA*^  ^ 

^  He  called  God  \oyo-n6.Tup,  because,  in  his  vie-n-,  God  is  both  Father  and  Logos.  ^  f-(,<tvf  e-^**** 

Sabellius  had  used  the  expression  v  I  o  naTup,  to  deny  the  personal  distinction  be-  a*^tL  ft^o<X_^ 

tween  the  Father  and  the  Son.     Photinus  had  to  say  instead  of  this,  \  o  y  o  Trdtwp,  ■Cuv»''*^<« 

because,  in  his  riew,  the  \6yos,  not  the  vlos,  is  eternally  in.  God.  »^flU<^uv^.  -t-  C 

'  Comp.  on  Photinus,  Athanas.,  De  syn.  26  ;  Epiph.,  Haer.  71 ;  Hilary,  De  trmit.     v 

vii.  3-7,  etc. ;  Baur,  1.  c.  vol.  i.  p.  542  sqq. ;   Domer,  1.  c.  i.  p.  881  sq. ;  and  Hefele,  ^1^^ 


654  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


§  127.     The  Nicene  Doctfine  of  the  Comubstantiality  of  the 
Son  with  the  Father. 

Comp.  the  literature  in  §§119  and  120,  especially  the  four  Orations  of 
AinANAsius  against  the  Arians,  and  the  other  anti-Arian  tracts  of  this 
"  father  of  orthodoxy." 

The  KicENE,  HOMO-orsiANj  or  AxHAiirASiAN  doctrine  was 
most  clearly  and  powerfully  represented  in  the  East  by  Atha- 
nasiiis,  in  whom  it  became  flesh  and  blood ; '  and  next  to  him, 
by  Alexander  of  Alexandiia,  Mai'cellus  of  Ancyra  (who  how- 
ever strayed  into  Sabellianism),  Basil,  and  the  two  Gregories 
of  Cappadocia;  and  in  the  "West  by  Ambrose  and  Hilary. 

The  central  point  of  the  IsTicene  doctrine  in  the  contest  with 
Arianism  is  the  identity  of  essence  or  the  consubstantiality  of 
the  Son  with  the  Father,  and  is  expressed  in  this  article  of  the 
(original)  Nicene  Creed :  "  [We  believe]  in  one  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God ;  who  is  begotten  the  only-begotten  of 
the  Father ;  that  is,  of  the  essence  of  the  Father,  God  of  God, 
and  Light  of  Light,  very  God  of  very  God,  begotten,  not  made, 
being  of  one  substance  with  the  Father."  "^ 

The  term  ofxaovaio^,  cotisubstantial,  is  of  course  no  more 
a  biblical  term,'  than  trinity  /  *  but  it  had  already  been  used, 

'  Particularly  distinguished  are  his  four  Orations  against  the  Arians,  written  in 
356. 

*  Kal  eh  eva  Kvpioy  ^Itjctovv  Xpitrrbf,  rhv  vlhv  tov  Qeov  •  yfvyy]b(VTa,  in  rod 
Tlarphs  tiovoyevri '  tovt'  iariv  e/c  t^s  ovcrlas  rod  Tlarphs,  Qehy  eK  Qeov  koI  <pws  e/c 
(pairhSf  Qehv  a\ri^Lyhv  e/c  Qeov  a\7]^ivov  •  •yevvq^evra,  oh  Tronj^eVra,  bfioovtriov  tcjJ 
IlaTpi,  K.T.A. 

'  Though  John's  Qehs  ?iv  o  kSyos  (John  i.  1),  and  Paul's  rh  elvai  la  a  @e^ 
(Phil.  ii.  6),  are  akin  to  it.  The  latter  passage,  indeed,  since  If  era  is  adverbial, 
denotes  rather  divine  existence,  than  divine  being  or  essence,  which  would  be  more 
correctly  expressed  by  to  ehat  iaov  ©eoT ,  or  by  laS^eo s.  But  the  latter  would 
be  equally  in  harmony  with  Paul's  theology.  The  Jews  used  the  masc.  iixos,  though 
in  a  polemical  sense,  when  they  drew  from  the  way  in  which  he  called  himself  pre- 
eminently and  exclusively  the  Son  of  God  the  logical  inference,  that  he  made  him- 
self equal  with  God,  John  v.  18:  "On  .  .  .  -narepa  X^lov  eKeye  rhv  Qehp,  ia-of 
eavrhf  iruiwv  r  cfi  @e^.     The  Vulgate  translates :  cequalem  se  facicns  Deo. 

*  The  word  rpiay  and  trinitas,  in  this  appUcation  to  the  Godhead,  appears  first 
in  Tbeophilus  of  Antioch  and  Athcnagoras  in  the  second  century,  and  m  TertuUian 
in  the  third.     Confessions  of  faitli  must  be  drawn  up  in  language  different  from  the 


liStii 


§    127.      THE   I^ICENE   DOCTRINE   OF   CONSUBSTANTIALITT.    655 

though  in  a  different  sense,  both  by  heathen  writers '  and  by 
heretics,^  as  "well  as  by  orthodox  fathers/  It  formed  a  bulwark 
against  Arians  and  Semi-Arians,  and  an  anchor  which  moored 
the  church  during  the  stormy  time  between  the  first  and  the 
second  ecumenical  councils/  At  first  it  had  a  negative  mean- 
ing against  heresy;  denying,  as  Athanasius  repeatedly  says, 
that  the  Son  is  in  any  sense  created  or  produced  and  change- 
Scriptures — else  they  mean  nothing  or  everything — since  they  are  an  interpretation 
of  the  Scriptures  and  intended  to  exclude  false  doctrines. 

*  Bull,  Def.  fidei  Nic,  Works,  vol.  v.  P.  i.  p.  10 :  "  'O/jloovctiov  a  probatis  Gracis 
scriptoribus  id  dicitur,  quod  ejusdem  cum  altero  substantiae,  essentias,  sive  naturae 
est."  He  then  cites  some  passages  from  profane  writers.  Thus  Porphyry  says,  De 
abstinentia  ab  esu  animahum,  lib.  i.  n.  19 :  Efye  o/xoovcrioi  al  tSiv  ^uiaiv  i|/uxal  ^/uere- 
poij,  I.  e.,  siquidem  animae  animahum  sunt  ejusdem  cum  nostris  essentiae.  Aristotle 
(in  a  quotation  in  Origen)  speaks  of  the  consubstantiality  of  all  stars,  oixoovaia  travra 
&a-Tpa,  omnia  astra  sunt  ejusdem  essentias  sive  naturae. 

^  First  by  the  Gnostic  Valentine,  in  Ireuceus,  Adv.  haer.  1.  i.  cap.  1,  §  1  and  §  5 
(ed.  Stieren,  vol.  i.  57  and  66).  In  the  last  passage  it  is  said  of  man  that  he  is 
v\tK6s,  and  as  such  very  hke  God,  indeed,  but  not  consubstantial,  Trapair\ri<nov  ney, 
d\\'  oiix  ofxooiaiov  T(f  Qeca.  The  Manichaeans  called  the  human  soul,  in  the  sense 
of  their  emanation  system,  ojxoovcnov  ry  Qicf,  Agapius,  in  Photius  (Bibl.  Cod.  179), 
calls  even  the  sun  and  the  moon,  in  a  pantheistic  sense,  duoovata  Qe<^.  The  Sabel- 
lians  used  the  word  of  the  trinity,  but  in  opposition  to  the  distinction  of  persons. 

'  Origen  deduces  from  the  figurative  description  aTavya(r/j.a,  Heb.  .i.  3,  the 
bjxooiKTiov  of  the  Son.  His  disciples  rejected  the  term,  indeed,  at  the  council  at 
Antioch  in  264,  because  the  heretical  Paul  of  Samosata  gave  it  a  perverted  meaning, 
taking  ohaia.  for  the  common  source  from  which  the  three  divine  persons  first 
derived  their  being.  But  towards  the  end  of  the  third  century  the  word  was  intro- 
duced again  into  church  use  by  Theognostus  and  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  as  Atha- 
nasius, De  Deer.  Syn.  Nic.  c.  25  (ed.  Bened.  i.  p.  230),  demonstrates.  Eusebius,  Ep. 
ad  Caesarienses  c.  1  (in  Socr.  H.  E.  i.  8,  and  in  Athan.  Opera  i.  241),  says  that  some 
early  bishops  and  authors,  learned  and  celebrated  {ruv  iraKaiuv  tlvols  Koylovs  koI 
ivKpaveis  iiri(rK6wovi  koI  (Tvyjpa<pus\  used  onoovcriov  of  the  Godhead  of  the  Father 
and  Son.  Tertullian  (Adv.  Prax.)  applied  the  corresponding  Latin  phrase  unius 
substanticE  to  the  persons  of  the  holy  Trinity. 

*  Cunningham  (Hist.  Theology,  i.  p.  291)  says  of  o/xoova-ws:  "The  number  of 
these  individuals  who  held  the  substance  of  the  Nieeue  doctrine,  but  objected  to  the 
phraseology  in  which  it  was  expressed,  was  very  small  [?] — and  the  evil  thereof, 
was  very  inconsiderable ;  while  the  advantage  was  invaluable  that  resulted  from  the 
possession  and  the  use  of  a  definite  phraseology,  which  shut  out  all  supporters  of 
error,  combined  nearly  all  the  maintainors  of  truth,  and  formed  a  rallying-poiut 
around  which  the  whole  orthodox  church  ultimately  gathered,  after  the  confusion 
and  distraction  occasioned  by  Arian  cunning  and  Arian  persecution  had  passed 
away." 


656  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

able.'  But  afterwards  tlie  homoousion  became  a  positive  test- 
word  of  orthodoxy,  designating,  in  the  sense  of  the  Nicene 
council,  clearly  and  unequivocally,  the  veritable  and  essential 
deity  of  Christ,  in  opposition  to  all  sorts  of  apparent  or  half 
divinity,  or  mere  similarity  to  God.  «,  The  same  divine,  eternal, 
unchangeable  essence,  which  is  in  an  original  way  in  the 
Father,  is,  from  eternity,  in  a  derived  way,  through  generation, 
in  the  Son ;  just  as  the  water  of  the  fountain  is  in  the  stream, 
or  the  light  of  the  sun  is  in  the  ray,  and  cannot  be  separated 
from  it.  Hence  the  Lord  says :  "  I  am  in  the  Father,  and  the 
Father  in  Me;"  "He  that  hath  seen  Me  hath  seen  the 
Father ; "  "I  and  My  Father  are  one."  This  is  the  sense  of 
the  expression:  "God  of  God,"  "very  God  of  very  God." 
Christ,  in  His  divine  nature,  is  as  fully  consubstantial  with  the 
Father,  as,  in  His  human  nature,  He  is  with  man ;  flesh  of  our 
flesh,  and  bone  of  our  bone ;  and  yet,  with  all  this,  He  is  an 
independent  person  with  respect  to  the  Father,  as  He  is  with 
respect  to  other  men.  In  this  view  Basil  turns  the  term 
6fj,oovaio<;  against  the  Sabellian  denial  of  the  personal  distinc- 
tions in  the  Trinity,  since  it  is  not  the  seane  thing  that  is  con- 
substantial  with  itself,  but  one  thing  that  is  consubstantial  with 
another.^  Consubstantiality  among  men,  indeed,  is  predicated 
of  difl'erent  individuals  who  partake  of  the  same  nature,  and 
the  term  in  this  view  might  denote  also  unity  of  species  in  a 
tritheistic  sense. 

But  in  the  case  before  us  the  personal  distinction  of  the 
Son  from  the  Father  must  not  be  pressed  to  a  duality  of  sub- 
stances of  the  same  kind;  the  homoousion,  on  the  contrary, 
must  be  understood  as  identity  or  numerical  unity  of  sub- 
stance, in  distinction  from  mere  generic  unity.  Otherwise  it 
leads  manifestly  into  dualism  or  tritheism.     The  Nicene  doe- 


*  Athanas.  Epist.  de  Decretis  Syn.  Nicren39,  cap.  20  (i.  p.  226);  c.  26  (p.  231); 
and  elsewhere. 

*  Basil.  M.  Epist.  lii.  3  (torn.  iii.  146) :  Ai/Vrj  Se  ^  ^wfT/  koL  rh  rod  "ZaUeWiou 
KaKbv  i^avopbovrai  •  avaipei  yap  t?;v  ravrdrrira  ttjj  viroffTacreus  Kcl  elcrdyet  reXeiay 
Tuv  ■Kpoa-dnroiv  tV  ivvoiav  •  (tollit  cnim  hypostaseos  identitatem  perfectamque  per- 
SOUarum  UOtionem  inducit)  oh  yap  aiirh  rt  iartv  eavrqi  dfxoovcrtoy,  dA\'  erepoy  krfpw 
(non  enim  idem  sibi  ipsi  consubstantiale  est,  sed  alteram  alteri). 


M. 


§   127.      THE  NICENE   DOCTRINE   OF   CONSUBSTANnALITY.    657 

trine  refuses  to  swerve  from  tlie  monotheistic  basis,  and  stands 
between  Sabellianism  and  tritlieism ;  thongli  it  must  be  ad- 
mitted that  the  usage  of  ovala  and  viroaTaac^  still  wavered  for 
a  time,  and  the  relation  of  the  eonsubstantiality  to  the  numerical 
unity  of  the  divine  essence  did  not  come  clearly  out  till  a  later 
day.  Athanasius  insists  that  the  unity  of  the  divine  essence  is 
indivisible,  and  that  there  is  only  one  principle  of  Godhead. > 
He  fi'equently  illustrates  the  relation,  as  Tertullian  had  done 
before  him,  by  the  relation  between  fire  and  brightness,'^  or 
between  fountain  and  stream ;  though  in  these  illustrations 
the  proverbial  insufficiency  of  all  similitudes  must  never  be 
forgotten.  "  We  must  not,"  says  he,  "  take  the  words  in  John 
xiv.  10  :  '  I  am  in  the  Father  and  the  Father  in  Me,'  as  if  the 
Father  and  the  Son  were  two  different  interpenetrating  and 
mutually  complemental  substances,  like  two  bodies  which  fill 
one  vessel.  The  Father  is  full  and  perfect,  and  the  Son  is  the 
fulness  of  the  Godhead."  ^  ''  We  must  not  imagine,"  says  he 
in  another  place,  "  three  divided  substances '  in  God,  as  among 
men,  lest  we,  like  the  heathen,  invent  a  multiplicity  of  gods ; 
but  as  the  stream  which  is  born  of  the  fountain,  and  not  sep- 
arated from  it,  though  there  are  two  forms  and  names.  Nei- 
ther is  the  Father  the  Son,  nor  the  Son  the  Father ;  for  the 
Father  is  the  Father  of  the  Son,  and  the  Son  is  the  Son  of  the 
Father.  As  the  fountain  is  not  the  stream,  nor  the  stream  the 
fountain,  but  the  two  are  one  and  the  same  water  which  flows 
from  the  fountain  into  the  stream ;  so  the  Godhead  pours  itself, 
without  division,  from  the  Father  into  the  Son.     Hence  the 

'  Orat.  iv.  contra  Arianos,  c.  1  (torn.  i.  p.  617):  "fluTe  5vo  fj.fv  ehai  irarepa  koI 
viov,  fjLovaSa  5e  i&eoTTjroy  ao  t  alp  er  ov  Kal  affx'^'^'''  ov  .  •  .  /i«o  apx^ 
deoTTjToy   KoX  oh  Svo  apxa'',  o^ev  Kvpliiis  Kal  fj.ovapxlO'  eVriV. 

^  -£".  (/.,  Orat.  iv.  c.  Arianos,  c.  10  (p.  624):  "Ecrru  Se  irapa5eiyiJ.a  avbpdnnvov  rh 
vvp  Ka\  rh  e|  avrov  airair/acTfia  (ignis  et  splendor  ex  eo  Ortus),  Svo  Mf"  rtpihai  [this 
is  not  accurate,  and  strictly  taken  would  lead  to  two  ovalai]  kuI  SpaaSrai,  eV  Se  ry  e| 
avTov  Kal  aSiaipiTov  elyai  rh  airaxryaay-a  auTov. 

Orat.  iii.  c.  Arian.  c.  1  (p.  551) :  n\rjpns  kuI  TiMios  (<tth  6  ttottjp,  Kal  Tr\i]p(i;fj.a 
SfOTTjToj  edTiv  6  tlos. 

Tpels  uiroo-Tcto-eij  [here,  as  often  in  the  Nicene  age,  synonymous  with  ovcriai] 
ue^epio-^eVas  ko^'  favrds.  Athan.  Expos.  Fidei  or  "E/c^ecrt j  Trio-Te&js,  cap.  2  (Opera, 
ed.  Bened.  i,  p.  100). 

VOL.  II. — i2 


K^' 


658  THIKD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Lord  says :  I  went  forth,  from  tlie  Father,  and  come  from  the 
Father.  Yet  He  is  ever  witli  the  Father,  He  is  in  the  bosom 
of  the  Father,  and  the  bosom  of  the  Father  is  never  emptied 
of  the  Godhead  of  the  Son."  ' 

Tlie  Son  is  of  the  essence  of  the  Father,  not  by  division  or 
diminution,  but  by  simple  and  perfect   self-communication, 
^y  This  divine  self-communication  of  eternal  love  is  represented 

by  the  figure  of  generation^  suggested  by  the  bibllical  terms 
Father  and  Son,  the  only-hegotten  Son,  the  firsthorn^  The 
eternal  generation  is  an  internal  j)rocess  in  the  essence  of  God, 
and  the  Son  is  an  immanent  offspring  of  this  essence ;  whereas 
creation  is  an  act  of  the  will  of  God,  and  the  creature  is 
exterior  to  the  Creator,  and  of  different  substance.  The  Son, 
as  man,  is  produced ; '  as  God,  he  is  unproduced  or  uncreated  ;  * 
he  is  begotten  ^  from  eternity  of  the  unbegotten  *  Father.  To 
this  Athanasius  refers  the  passage  concerning  the  Only-begot- 
ten who  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father.'' 

Generation  and  creation  are  therefore  entirely  different 
ideas.  Generation  is  an  immanent,  necessary,  and  pei-petual 
process  in  the  essence  of   God  himself,  the  Father's  eternal 

'  Expositio  Fidei,  cap.  2 :  'Hs  fv.p  ovk  %(ttiv  j)  irr]y}}  itorujj.'bs,  ov^'k  6  TroTa/xhs 
■trriyii,  aficpoTepa  5e  ev  Kal  ralirov  icrTiv  vSxp  rh  iK  rrjs  Tnry^i  /uerexfi'fii""''"')  ouroiy  7) 
iK  rod  Trarphs  els  rhy  vlhv  ScJttjs  a^pevcTws  koI  aSiaipeTUs  Tvyxdvei,  k.t.A. 

^  IlaT^p,  vihs,  ixovoyivT}^  vUs  (frequent  in  John),  TrptarSTOKos  irdc-ns  KTiaeais  (Col. 
i.  15).  Waterland  (Works,  i.  p.  368)  says  of  this  pomt  of  the  Nicene  doctrine, 
"  that  an  explicit  profession  of  eternal  generation  might  have  been  dispensed  with : 
provided  only  that  the  eternal  existence  of  the  \6yos,  as  a  7'eal  subsisting  person,  in 
and  of  the  Father,  which  comes  to  the  same  thing,  might  be  secured.  This  was  the 
point ;  and  this  was  all." 

'  Tivr)T6s  (not  to  be  confounded  with  yivvt)T6s),  iroir]T6s,  factus.  Comp.  John 
i.  14 :  'O  \6yoi  ""op?  iyeyfTo. 

*  'AyfyyjTo?,  ou  iroiTjdefr,  non-factus,  increatus;  not  to  be  confounded  with 
ayepvrjTos,  non-gcnitus,  which  belongs  to  the  Father  alone. 

^  TevvnTos,  or,  as  in  the  Symb.  Nic.  yfwrjbeU,  genitus. 

^  'AyivvriTos,  non-gcnitus.  This  terminology  is  very  frequent  in  the  writings  of 
Athanasius,  especially  in  the  Orat.  i.  contra  Arianos,  and  in  his  Epist.  de  decretis 
Syn.  Nic. 

'  John  i.  18 :  'O  fiovoyiv^s  vlbs,  b  Siv  (a  perpetual  or  eternal  relation,  not  h)  «'s 
(motion,  in  distinction  from  eV)  thv  k6Kttov  toD  Trarpos.  Comp.  Athanas.  Epist.  de 
deer.  S.  N.  C.  22  (torn.  i.  p.  227) :  Ti  yhp  HWo  rh  eV  k6\vois  (nnxaiyei,  fj  tV  yvrjnlav 
tK  rou  TToT/ibj  rod  vlov  yevvi](Tiv ;   C^ 


§   127.      THE   NICENE   DOCTKIlfE   OF  CONSUBSTANTIALITT.    659 

communication  of  essence  or  self  to  the  Son ;  creation,  on  the 
contrary,  is  an  outwardly  directed,  free,  single  act  of  the  will 
of  God,  bringing  forth  a  different  and  temporal  substance  out 
of  nothing.  The  eternal  fatherhood  and  sonship  in  God  is 
the  perfect  prototype  of  all  similar  relations  on  earth.  But 
the  divine  generation  differs  from  all  human  generation,  not 
only  in  its  absolute  sphituality,  but  also  in  the  fact  that  it 
does  not  produce  a  new  essence  of  the  same  kind,  but  that 
the  begotten  is  identical  in  essence  with  the  begetter;  for  the 
divine  essence  is  by  reason  of  its  simplicity,  incapable  of 
division,  and  by  reason  of  its  infinity,  incapable  of  increase.' 
The  generation,  properly  speaking,  has  no  reference  at  all  to 
the  essence,  but  only  to  the  hj^Dostatical  distinction.  The  Son 
is  begotten  not  as  God,  but  as  Son,  not  as  to  his  natura,  but 
as  to  his  t'StoT?/?,  his  peculiar  property  and  his  relation  to  the 
Father.  The  divine  essence  neither  begets,  nor  is  begotten. 
The  same  is  true  of  the  processio  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which 
has  reference  not  to  the  essence,  but  only  to  the  person,  of  the 
Spirit.  In  human  generation,  moreover,  the  father  is  older 
than  the  son ;  but  in  the  divine  generation,  which  takes 
place  not  in  time,  but  is  eternal,  there  can  be  no  such  thing  as 
priority  or  posteriority  of  one  or  the  other  hypostasis.  To  the 
question  whether  the  Son  existed  hefore  his  generation,  Cyril 
of  Alexandria  answered  :  "  The  generation  of  the  Son  did  not 
precede  his  existence,  but  he  existed  eternally,  and  eternally 
existed    by  generation."     The   Son  is   as    necessary  to   the 

*  Bishop  John  Pearson,  in  his  well-known  work :  An  Exposition  of  the  Creed 
(Art.  ii.  p.  209,  ed.  W.  S.  Dobson,  New  York,  1851),  thus  clearly  and  rightly  exhib- 
its the  Nicene  doctrine  in  this  point :  "  In  human  generations  the  son  is  of  the 
same  nature  with  the  father,  and  yet  is  not  the  same  man ;  because  though  he  has 
an  essence  of  the  same  kind,  yet  he  has  not  the  same  essence ;  the  power  of  genera- 
tion dependmg  on  the  first  prolifical  benediction,  iiicrease  and  multiply,  it  must  be 
made  by  way  of  multiplication,  and  thus  every  son  becomes  another  man.  But  the 
divine  essence,  being  by  reason  of  its  simplicity  not  subject  to  division,  and  in 
respect  of  its  infinity  incapable  of  multiplication,  is  so  cormnunicated  as  not  to  be 
multipUed ;  insomuch  that  he  who  proceeds  by  that  communication,  has  not  only 
the  same  nature,  but  is  also  the  same  God.  The  Father  God,  and  the  Word  God; 
Abraham  man  and  Isaac  man :  but  Abraham  one  man,  Isaac  another  man ;  not  so 
the  Father  one  God  and  the  Word  another,  but  the  Father  and  the  Word  both  the 
same  God." 


660  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

t)  being  of   the   Father,   as    the   Father  to   the  being   of   the 

Son.  ^ 

The  necessity  thus  asserted  of  the  eternal  generation  does 
not,  however,  inipair  its  freedom,  but  is  intended  only  to  deny 
its  being  arbitrary  and  accidental,  and  to  secure  its  foundation 
in  the  essence  of  God  himself.  God,  to  be  Father,  must  from 
eternity  beget  the  Son,  and  so  reproduce  himself;  yet  he  does 
this  in  obedience  not  to  a  foreign  law,  but  to  his  own  law  and 
the  impulse  of  his  will.  Athanasius,  it  is  true,  asserts  on  the 
^  one  hand  that  God  begets  the  Son  not  of  his  will,'  but  by  his 
nature,^  yet  on  the  other  hand  he  does  not  admit  that  God 
begets  the  Son  without  will,"  or  of  force  or  unconscious  neces- 
sity. The  generation,  therefore,  rightly  understood,  is  an  act 
at  once  of  essence  and  of  will.  Augustine  calls  the  Son  "  will 
of  will."  *     In  God  fi-eedom  and  necessity  coincide. 

The  mode  of  the  divine  generation  is  and  must  be  a  mys- 
tery. Of  course  all  human  representations  of  it  must  be 
avoided,  and  the  matter  be  conceived  in  a  purely  moral  and 
spiritual  way.  The  eternal  generation,  conceived  as  an  intel- 
lectual process,  is  the  eternal  self-knowledge  of  God  ;  reduced 
to  ethical  terms,  it  is  his  eternal  and  absolute  love  in  its  motion 
and  working  within  himself.  ^' 

In  his  argimaent  for  the  consubstantiality  of  the  Son,  Atha- 
nasius, in  his  four  orations  against  the  Arians,  besides  addu- 
cing the  proof  from  Scripture,  which  presides  over  and 
permeates  all  other  arguments,  sets  out  now  in  a  practical 
method  from  the  idea  of  redemption,  now  in  a  speculative, 
from  the  idea  of  God. 

Christ  has  delivered  us  from  the  curse  and  power  of  sin, 
reconciled  ns  with  God,  and  made  us  partakers  of  the  eternal, 
divine  life  ;  therefore  he  must  himself  be  God.  Or,  negative- 
ly :  If  Chi'ist  were  a  creature,  he  could  not  redeem  other  crea- 
tures from  sin  and  death.  It  is  assumed  that  redemption  is  as 
much  and  as  strictly  a  divine  work,  as  creation.*  ^ 


-     !?f»      ^^    <L  ^ 


Mtj  e/c  fiou^vcreais. 


V^^-^^     \.  •"  'AjSouA^Tws  and  aaeATjTws.   -^ '^    J^<4*Vj. 


Yoluntas  de  voluntate.     De  trinit.  xv.  20. 
i^  c-  >  ?  .  ^   °  Comp.  particularly  the  second  oration  contra  Arianos,  c.  69  sqq. 


t- J.||^-X 


'U^^4£. 


.^ 


ti  ^^  ^ 


V 


^^^:^v 


/^tr^  S^i.ti t'-e^Sif. ^  -'^^■J/  lyrntZt^v-e/i-    /^  '^  ^  j    re^e^'  /Xt  e/e-r^tin^ 

«?     y'^*i'/-t;?*-r^^^;V^-*^»,   ^-^      /V^f^,     /^^ru    :  -p^,  '''''^    ^i^^O^J  O^^t^v^ ^ 
\/cm.    i^    a^i    eji^i£4iZi  a.1^    6rfii     /iay&i-n-i^   ^^fe     7h^,c^^  o-^   /^ 

^^  V/-  f^:  ';j5e.  V^U^  ^-^  i-^  '-   --^^    ^^-^    '^  '-^^-^  ^^^  '^"^ 


ik 


§   127.      THE   NICENE   DOCTEINE   OF   CONSUBSTANTIALITY.    661 

Starting  from  the  idea  of  God,  Atlianasius  argues  :  Tlie 
relation  of  Father  is  not  accidental,  arising  in  time ;  else  God 
would  be  changeable ; '  it  belongs  as  necessarily  to  the  essence 
and  character  of  God  as  the  attributes  of  eternity,  wisdom, 
goodness,  and  holiness ;  consequently  he  must  have  been 
Father  from  eternity,  and  this  gives  the  eternal  generation  of 
the  Son.^  Tlie  divine  fatherhood  and  sonship  is  the  prototj^pe 
of  all  analagous  relations  on  earth.  As  there  is  no  Son  with- 
out Father,  no  more  is  there  Father  without  Son.  An  unfruit- 
ful Father  were  like  a  dark  light,  or  a  diy  fountain,  a  self- 
contradiction.  The  non-existence  of  creatures,  on  the  contra- 
ry, detracts  nothing  from  the  perfection  of  the  Creator,  since 
he  always  has  the  power  to  create  when  he  will.'  The  Son  is 
of  the  Father's  own  interior  essence,  while  the  creature  is 
exterior  to  God  and  dependent  on  the  act  of  his  will.*  God. 
furthermore,  cannot  be  conceived  without  reason  {dXoyoi), 
wisdom,  power,  and  according  to  the  Scriptures  (as  the  Arians 
themselves  concede)  the  Son  is  the  Logos,  the  wisdom,  the 
power,  the  "Word  of  God,  by  which  all  things  were  made.     As 

'  Orat.  L  contra  Arianos,  C.  28  (p.  433) :  Ata  tovto  ael  Trar^p  koI  ovk  iiriyeyore 
(accidit)  t^  0e<j?  rh  irarTip,  ha  /utJ  kuI  Tpenrhs  elvai  vofua^y.  Et  yap  Ka\ov  rh  ehai 
avThv  TraTepa,  oIk  ael  5e  ^v  narrjp,  ovk  oel  &pu  rh  Ka\hv  ?jv  eV  alrQ.  Though  to  this 
it  might  be  objected  that  by  the  incarnation  of  the  Logos  and  the  permanent  recep- 
tion of  human  nature  into  fellowship  with  the  divine,  a  certain  change  has  passed, 
after  all,  upon  the  deity. 

"  Orat.  ii.  c.  Arianos,  c.  1  sqq.  (p.  469  sqq.);  Orat.  iii.  c.  66  (p.  615),  and  else- 
where. 

^  This  last  argument,  in  the  formally  logical  point  of  view,  may  not  be  perfectly 
vaUd ;  for  there  may  as  well  be  a  distinction  between  an  ideal  and  real  fatherhood, 
as  between  an  ideal  and  real  creatorship  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  one  might  reason 
with  as  good  right  backwards  from  the  notion  of  essential  omnipotence  to  an  eternal 
creation,  and  say  with  Hegel :  Without  the  world  God  is  not  God.  But  from  the 
speculative  and  ethical  point  of  view  a  difference  must  imquestionably  be  admitted, 
and  an  element  of  truth  be  acknowledged  in  the  argument  of  Athanasius.  The 
Father  needed  the  Son  for  his  own  self-consciousness,  which  is  inconceivable  with- 
out an  object.  God  is  essentially  love,  and  this  reahzes  itself  in  the  relation  of 
Father  and  Son,  and  in  the  fellowship  of  the  Spirit :  Ubi  amor  ibi  trinitas. 

*  Orat.  i.  c.  29  (p.  433):  T^  TTolriixa  i^wbev  tov  iroiOvvTSs  icTTLv  .  .  .  6  Se  vlls 
iSiov  T^s  ovaias  yivv7\ixa  iari  •  Sth  Ka\  rh  niv  irolrj/jia  ovk  avayKi)  aei  itvai,  ore  yap 
$ov\iTai  6  57}fnovpyhs  ipyd^eTai,  rh  Se  yevvT]fj.a  oh  jSoi/Aijcret  uTrJ/cetTai,  dAAa  ttjj 
ohaias  eVriy  tSiJrTjy. 


662  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

light  rises  from  fire,  and  is  inseparable  from  it,  so  the  Word 
from  God,  the  Wisdom  from  the  Wise,  and  the  Son  from  the 
Father.^  The  Son,  therefore,  was  in  the  beginning,  that  is,  in 
the  beginning  of  the  eternal  divine  being,  in  the  original  be- 
ginning, or  from  eternity.  He  himself  calls  himself  one  with 
the  Father,  and  Paul  praises  bim  as  God  blessed  forever.^ 

Finally  Christ  cannot  be  a  proper  object  of  worship,  as  he 
is  represented  in  Scripture  and  has  always  been  regarded  in 
the  Church,  without  being  strictly  divine.  To  w^orship  a 
creature  is  idolatry. 

When  we  attentively  peruse  the  warm,  vigorous,  eloquent, 
and  discriminating  controversial  writings  of  Athanasius  and 
his  co-laborers,  and  compare  with  them  the  vague,  baiTen, 
almost  entirely  negative  assertions  and  superficial  arguments 
of  their  opponents,  we  cannot  escape  the  impression  that,  with 
all  their  exegetical  and  dialectical  defects  in  particulars, 
they  have  on  their  side  an  overwhelming  preponderance  of 
positive  truth,  the  authority  of  holy  Scripture,  the  profounder 
speculations  of  reason,  and  the  prevailing  traditional  faith  of 
the  early  church.' 

^  Comp.  the  4tli  Oration  against  the  Arians,  cap.  1  sqq.  (p.  61 Y  sqq.) 
-  The  06o's  in  the  well-known  passage,  Rom.  ix.  5,  is  thus  repeatedly  by  Atha- 
nasius, e.  g.y  Orat.  i.  contra  Arianos,  c.  11;  Orat.  iv.  c.  1,  and  by  other  fathers 
(Irenseus,  Tertullian,  Cyprian,  Origen,  Chrysostom),  as  well  as  by  the  Reformers 
and  most  of  the  orthodox  expositors,  referred  to  Christ.  This  interpretation,  too, 
is  most  suitable  to  the  connection,  and  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  Christology  of 
Paul,  who  sets  forth  Christ  as  the  image  of  God,  the  possessor  of  the  fulness  of  the 
divine  life  and  glory,  the  object  of  worship  (Phil.  ii.  6  ;  Col.  i.  15  ff. ;  ii.  9  ;  2  Cor. 
iv.  4 ;  Eph.  v.  5 ;  1  Tim.  iii.  16 ;  Tit.  ii.  13) ;  and  who  therefore,  as  well  as  John, 
i.  1,  could  call  him  iu  the  predicative  sense  ©eo'j,  i.  e.,  of  divine  essence,  in  distinc- 
tion from  6  0eds  with  the  article. 

'  We  say  the  prevailing  faith  ;  not  denying  that  the  theological  knowledge  and 
statement  of  the  doctrine  of  the  trinity  had  hitherto  been  in  many  respects  indefinite 
and  wavering.  The  learned  bishop  Bull,  indeed,  endeavored  to  prove,  in  opposition 
to  the  Jesuit  Petavius,  that  the  ante-Nicene  fathers  taught  concerning  the  deity  of 
the  Son  the  very  same  things  as  the  Nicene.  Comp.  the  Preface  to  his  Defensio 
fidei  Xicsense,  ed.  Burton,  Oxf.  1827,  vol.  v.  Pars.  1,  p.  ix. :  "De  summa  rei,  quam 
aliis  persuadere  volo,  plane  ipse,  neque  id  temere,  persuasus  sum,  nempe,  quod  de 
Filii  divinitate  contra  Arium,  idem  re  ipsa  (quanquam  aliis  fortasse  nonnunquam 
verbis,  ahoque  loquendi  modo)  docuisse  Patrcs  ac  doctorcs  ccclcsije  probatos  ad 
unum  omnes,  qui  ante  tempera  synodi  Nicasnse,  ab  ipsa  usque  apostolorum  a^tate, 
fiorueruut."     But  this  assertion  can  be  maintained  only  by  an  artificial  and  forced 


/ 


§   128.      THE   DOCTKmE   OF  THE   HOLY   SPIRIT.  663 

The  spirit  and  tendency  of  the  Nicenc  doctrine  is  edifying ; 
it  magnifies  Christ  and  Christianity.  The  Arian  error  is  cold 
and  heartless,  degrades  Christ  to  the  sphere  of  the  creature, 
and  endeavors  to  substitute  a  heathen  deification  of  the  crea- 
ture for  the  true  worship  of  God.  For  this  reason  also  the 
faith  in  the  true  and  essential  deity  of  Christ  has  to  this  day 
an  inexhaustible  vitality,  while  the  irrational  Arian  fiction  of 
a  half-deity,  creating  the  world  and  yet  himself  created,  long 
ago  entirely  outlived  itself.' 


§  128.     The  Doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

The  decision  of  Nicsea  related  primarily  only  to  the  essential 
deity  of  Christ.  But  in  the  wider  range  of  the  Arian  contro- 
versies the  deity  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  stands  and  falls 
with  the  deity  of  the  Son,  was  indirectly  involved.  The  church 
always,  indeed,  connected  faith  in  the  Holy  Spirit  with  faith 
in  the  Father  and  Son,  but  considered  the  doctrine  concerning 
the  Holy  Spirit  as  only  an  appendix  to  the  doctrine  concerning 
the  Father  and  the  Son,  until  the  logical  progress  brought  it 
to  lay  equal  emphasis  on  the  deity  and  personality  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  to  place  him  with  the  Father  and  Son  as  an 
element  of  equal  claim  in  the  Trinity. 

The  Arians  made  the  Holy  Ghost  the  first  creature  of  the 
Son,  and  as  subordinate  to  the  Son  as  the  Son  to  the  Father.  The 
Arian  trinity  was  therefore  not  a  trinity  immanent  and  eter- 
nal, but  arising  in  time  and  in  descending  grades,  consisting  of 
the  uncreated  God  and  two  created  demi-gods.  The  Semi- 
Arians  here,  as  elsewhere,  approached  the  orthodox  doctrine, 
but  rejected  the  consubstantiality,  and  asserted  the  creation,  of 
the  Spirit.  Thus  especially  Macedonius,  a  moderate  Semi- 
Arian,  whom  the  Arian  court-party  had  driven  from  the 
episcopal  chair  of  Constantinople.     From  him  the  adherents 

interpretation  of  many  passages,  and  goes  upon  a  mechanical  and  lifeless  view  of 
history.     Comp.  tkn  the  observations  of  W.  Cunningham,  Historical  Theology,  vol. 
i.  p.  269  ff.  ^ 
'",    ^  Domer,  1.  c.  i.  p.  883,  justly  says:  "Not  only  to  the  mind  of  our  time,  but  tc 


664  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

of  tlie  false  doctrine  concerning  tlie  Holy  Spirit,  were,  after 
362,  called  Macedonians  ; '  also  Pneumatomachi,''  and  Tkopici.^ 

Even  among  tlie  adherents  of  the  Nicene  orthodoxy  an 
uncertainty  still  for  a  time  prevailed  respecting  the  doctrine  of 
the  third  person  of  the  Holy  Trinity.  Some  held  the  Spirit  to 
be  an  impersonal  power  or  attribute  of  God ;  others,  at 
farthest,  would  not  go  beyond  the  expressions  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. Gregory  Kazianzen,  who  for  his  own  part  believed  and 
taught  the  consubstantiality  of  the  Holy  Ghost  with  the 
Father  and  the  Son,  so  late  as  380  made  the  remarkable  con- 
cession :  ^  "Of  the  wise  among  us,  some  consider  the  Holy 
Ghost  an  influence,  others  a  creature,  others  God  himself,"  and 
again  others  know  not  which  way  to  decide,  from  reverence, 
as  they  say,  for  the  Holy  Scripture,  which  declares  nothing 
exact  in  the  case.  For  this  reason  they  waver  between 
worshipping  and  not  worshipping  the  Holy  Ghost,*  and  strike 
a  middle  course,  which  is  in  fact,  however,  a  bad  one."  Basil, 
in  370,  still  carefully  avoided  calling  the  Holy  Ghost  God^ 
though  with  the  view  of  gaining  the  weak.  Hilary  of 
Poictiers  believed  that  the  Spirit,  who  searches  the  deep  things 
of  God,  must  be  divine,  but  could  find  no  Scripture  passage  in 
which  he  is  called  God,  and  thought  that  he  must  be  content 
with  the  existence  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  the  Scriptm'C 
teaches  and  the  heart  attests.'' 

But  the  church  could  not  possibly  satisfy  itself  with  only 
two  in  one.     The  baptismal  formula  and  the  apostolic  benedic- 

all  sound  reason,  does  it  seem  absurd,  nay,  superstitious,  that  an  under-god,  a  finite, 
created  being,  should  be  the  creator." 

^  Ma/ceSoj'ioi'oi. 

"^  nvev/xarSixaxoi. 

^  TpoTTiKoi.  This  name  comes  probably  from  their  explaming  as  mere  tropes 
(figurative  expressions)  or  metaphors  the  passages  of  Scripture  from  which  the  ortho- 
dox derived  the  deity  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Comp.  Athanas.,  Ad  Scrap.  Ep.  i.  c.  2 
(torn.  i.  Pars  ii.  p,  649). 

^  Orat.  xxxi.  De  Spiritu  sancto,  cap.  5  (Op.  tom.  i.  p.  559,  and  in  Thilo's  Brblio- 
thcca  P.  Gr.  dogm.  vol.  ii.  p.  503). 

'  Twu  KoS-'  Tj/xas  <T0(p(iiiv  ol  fXiv  ivepyeiav  tovto  [rb  wvevfjia,  ayiov^  uTreAajSoj',  ol  5e 
Krlffna,  ol  Se  QeSv. 

*  Ovre  cre'/Soufrir,  ovre  aTtixd^ovtrt, 

'  De  trinitate,  il  29  ;  and  xii.  55. 


§   128.      THE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   UOLY   SPURIT.  605 

tioD,  as  well  as  the  traditional  trinitarian  doxologies,  put  the 
Holj  Ghost  on  an  equality  with  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and 
require  a  divine  tri-personality  resting  upon  a  unity  of  essence. 
The  divine  triad  tolerates  in  itself  no  inequality  of  essence,  no 
mixture  of  Creator  and  creature.  Athanasius  well  perceived 
this,  and  advocated  with  decision  the  con  substantiality  of  the 
Holy  Spu'it  against  the  Pneuniatomachi  or  Tropici.^  Basil 
did  the  same,^  and  Gregory  of  Kazianzum,^  Gregory  of  Nys- 
sa,*  Didymus,^  and  Ambrose.^ 

This  doctrine  conquered  at  the  councils  of  Alexandria,  A. 
D.  362,  of  Eome,  375,  and  finally  of  Constantinople,  381,  and 
became  an  essential  constituent  of  the  ecumenical  orthodoxy. 

Accordingly  the  Creed  of  Constantinople  supplemented  the 
Nicene  with  the  important  addition :  "  And  in  the  Holy 
Ghost,  who  is  Lord  and  Giver  of  life,  who  with  the  Father  is 
worshipped  and  glorified,  who  spake  by  the  prophets." ' 

This  declares  the  consubstantiality  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  not 
indeed  in  words,  yet  in  fact,  and  challenges  for  him  divine 
dignity  and  worship. 

The  exegetical  proofs  employed  by  the  ISTicene  fathers  for 
the  deity  of  the  Holy  Ghost  are  chiefly  the  following.  The 
Holy  Ghost  is  nowhere  in  Scripture  reckoned  among  creatures 

'  In  the  four  Epistles  to  Serapion,  bishop  of  Tmuis,  vmtten  in  862  (Ep.  ad  Sera- 
pionem  Thmuitanum  episcopum  contra  illos  qui  blasphemant  et  dicunt  Spiritum  S. 
rem  creatam  esse),  in  his  Opera,  ed.  Bened.  torn.  i.  Pars  ii.  pp.  &-i7-1l4. ;  also  in 
Thilo's  BibUoth.  Patr.  Graec.  dogmatica,  vol.  i.  pp.  666-819. 

^  De  Spiritu  Saneto  ad  S.  Amphilochium  Iconii  episcopum  (Opera,  ed.  Bened. 
torn.  iii.  and  in  Thilo's  Bibl.  toI.  ii.  pp.  182-343). 

"  Orat.  xsxi.  De  Spiritu  Saneto  (Opera,  torn.  i.  p.  556  sqq.  and  in  Thilo's  Bibl. 
vol.  ii  pp.  497-537). 

*  Orat.  catech.  c.  2.     Comp.  Rupp,  Gregor  v.  Nyssa,  p.  169  sq. 

'  De  Spiritu  S.,  translated  by  Jerome. 

'  De  Spiritu  S.  Ubri  3. 

''  Similar  additions  had  already  been  previously  made  to  the  Xicene  Creed.  Thus 
Epiphanius  in  his  Ancorahis,  c.  120,  which  was  written  in  374,  gives  the  Nicene 
Creed  as  then  already  in  general  use  with  the  following  passage  on  the  Holy  Spirit : 
Kal  eis  TO  ayiov  Trvev/xa  TrurTevouey,  rh  KaXrjcrav  if  »'o,ua>,  kixI  K-qpv^ay  iu  rots  ■Kpo(p4i- 
rais  Kai  Kora^av  iirX  rhv  'lopSdin)v,  \aAovv  iv  a.iT0(n6\0LS,  oIkovv  Iv  ayloL^  •  ovtus  5J 
iricrTivofxeu  iv  avTw^  on  icrrl  iryevfia  aytov,  nyiv/xa  06o?,  TrveDjua  TeAeioj',  iri/evixa 
rapaK\riTov,  S/ctkttoi/,  €k  rou  TraTphs  iKiropivojXfvov,  koX  fK  tov  viov  \a/j.$av6fievov 
Kal  Trta-T€v6iJ.evov.     His  shorter  Creed,  Anc.  c.  119  (in  Migne's  ed.  torn.  iii.  231),  even 


666  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

or  angels,  but  is  placed  in  God  himself,  co-eternal  witli  God,  as 
that  which  searches  the  depths  of  Godhead  (1  Cor.  ii.  11, 12). 
He  fills  the  universe,  and  is  everywhere  present  (Ps.  cxxxix.  T), 
while  creatures,  even  angels,  are  in  definite  places.  He  was 
active  even  in  the  creation  (Gen.  i.  3),  and  filled  Moses  and 
the  prophets.  From  him  proceeds  the  divine  work  of  regene- 
ration and  sanctification  (John  iii.  5 ;  Rom.  i.  4 ;  viii.  11 ;  1 
Cor.  vi.  11 ;  Tit.  iii.  5-7 ;  Eph.  iii.  16  ;  v.  17,  19,  &c).  He 
is  the  source  of  all  gifts  in  the  church  (1  Cor.  xii).  He  dwells 
in  believers,  like  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and  makes  them 
partakers  of  the  divine  life.  Blasphemy  against  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  the  extreme  sin,  which  cannot  be  forgiven  (Matt.  xii. 
31).  Lying  to  the  Holy  Ghost  is  called  lying  to  God  (Acts  v. 
3,  4).  In  the  formula  of  baj)tism  (Matt,  xxviii.  19),  and  like- 
wise in  the  apostolic  benediction  (2  Cor.  xiii.  13),  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  put  on  a  level  with  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and  yet 
distinguished  from  both  ;  he  must  therefore  be  truly  divine, 
yet  at  the  same  time  a  self-conscious  person.'  The  Holy  Ghost 
is  the  source  of  sanctification,  and  unites  us  with  the  divine 
life,  and  thus  must  himself  be  divine.  The  divine  trinity  tole- 
rates in  itself  nothing  created  and  changeable.  As  the  Son 
is  begotten  of  the  Father  from  eternity,  so  the  Spii-it  proceeds 
from  the  Father  through  the  Son.  (The  procession  of  the 
Spirit  from  the  Son,  on  the  contrary,  is  a  subsequent  inference 
of  the  Latin  church  from  the  consubstantiality  of  the  Son,  and 
was  unknown  to  the  Xicene  fathers.) 

The  distinction  between  generation  and  procession  is  not 
particularly  defined.     Augustine  calls  both  inefi'able  and  in- 
explicable.^    The  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Ghost  was  not  in  any 
respect  so  accurately  developed  in  this  period,  as  the  doctrine 
.    concerning  Christ,  and  it  shows  many  gaps.  ' 

literally  agrees  with  that  of  Constantinople,  but  in  both  he  adds  the  anathema  of  the 
ori^al  Nicene  Creed. 

'  The  well-known  passage  concerning  the  three  witnesses  in  heaven,  1  John  v. 
7,  is  not  cited  by  the  Nicene  fathers :  a  strong  evidence  that  it  was  wanting  in  the 
manuscripts  of  the  Bible  at  that  tune. 

*  "  Ego  distinguere  nescio,  non  valeo,  non  sufficio,  propterea  quia  picut  generatio 
ita  processio  inenarrabilis  est."  ■  *  --  '/^-  ^-  '-^•••'  ^^**-  "^'^  <^i,^>r^-^^  a.  F>  ■ 


M 


§   129.      THE   NICENE  AKD   CONSTANTINOPOLITAN   CREED.    667 


§  129.     T/ie  Nioene  and  ConstantinopoUtan  Creed. 

We  ]oL>k  now  at  the  Creeds  of  Nicsea  and  Constantinople 
side  bj  side,  which  snm  up  the  result  of  these  long  contro- 
versies. We  mark  the  differences  by  inclosing  in  brackets 
the  parts  of  the  former  omitted  bj  the  latter,  and  italicizing 
the  additions  which  the  latter  makes  to  the  former. 

THE  NICENE   CREED   OF   325.'        THE     NIC^NO-CONSTANTINOPOLI- 

TAN   CREED   OF   381.^ 

Xli!7Tivop.(.v  eij  eVa  Qihv,  irarepa  itav-  ni(rrevofi(v  ei's  eVa  Qeov,  iroTepa  irav- 

TOKpaTopa,  nduTuy  dpaTtiv  Te  Koi  aoparwy  roKparopa,   TrocrjT^r  ovpavov  Kal  yris, 

iroLTjTTiy.  oparaiy  re  travrmv  Kal  aopd/ruy. 

Kal    fls   'iva   Kvpiov   'Irjcodf  Xpicrrhu,  Kal  els  eya  KvpLoy'lricrovu  XpicxThv  rhr 

rhv  vlhv   rov   ©eoO  •    yei'i'Ti^ei'Ta   (k  rov  vlhv  rod   Qeov  rhv  fiovoyf  vrj'  Thv   ex 

irarphs   [^fx.ovoyevrj  •    tovt    tcTTiv    in    rfjr  rov    varphs    yevfTj^evra,    irph    trivruv 

ovaias  rov   warphs'  Qehv  e/c  &eov  /cal ']  rwu  aluvosv'    (pus  eK  (pcorhs,  ©eiv  dA.Tj- 

(puis    e'/c    (poDrbs,   Qehv  aATj^ivhi/   iK   Qeov  ^ivhv    eK    ©eoD  aXri^tvov,    yevvri^€i/ra,  oh 

aKt)bivov  '      yevyrt^fvra,     oh    TTonj^evra,  Tronj^eVra,  ofj-oovcrLov  r^  Trarpl  •   5t'  ob  to 

o/xooviTiov   r<f    Trarpi  •     St'    ov    ra    iravra  i:a.vTa  iyivero  •  rhv  St'  Tj/xas  tous  av^pw- 

iyevero  [to   re   eV   r^   ohpavcf    koX  to  ev  ttovs  kuI  5ia  ri]v  Tj/xerepav  awrTjplav  Kur- 

^  It  is  found,  together  with  the  similar  Eusebian  (Palestinian)  confession,  in  the 
well-known  Epistle  of  Eusebius  of  Csesarea  to  his  diocese  (Epist.  ad  suae  parochite 
homines),  which  is  given  by  Athanasius  at  the  close  of  his  Epist.  de  decretis  Nicsenaa 
Synodi  (Opera,  torn.  i.  p.  239,  and  in  Thilo's  Bibl.  vol.  i.  p.  84  sq.) ;  also,  though 
with  some  variations,  by  Theodoret,  H.  E.  i.  12,  and  Socrates,  H.  E.  i.  8.  Sozomen 
omitted  it  (H.  E.  i.  10)  from  respect  to  the  disdplina  arcani.  The  Symbolum  Nica&- 
num  is  given  also,  with  unessential  variations,  by  Athanasius  in  his  letter  to  the  em- 
peror Jovian,  c.  3,  and  by  Gelasius  Cyzic,  Lib.  Synod,  de  Concil.  Nicaeno,  ii.  35.  On 
the  unimportant  variations  in  the  text,  comp.  Walch,  Bibl.  symbol,  p.  75  sqq.,  and 
A.  Hahn,  Bibliothek  der  Symbole,  1842.  Comp.  also  the  parallel  Creeds  of  the 
Nicene  age  in  the  Appendix  to  Pearson's  Exposition  of  the  Creed. 

*  Found  in  the  Acts  of  the  second  ecumenical  council  in  all  the  collections 
(Mansi,  tom.  iii.  566 ;  Harduin,  i.  814).  It  probably  does  not  come  directly  from 
this  council,  still  less  from  the  individual  authorship  of  Gregory  of  Nyssa  or  Gregory 
of  Nazianzum  to  whom  it  has  sometmies  been  ascribed,  but  the  additions  by  which  it 
is  distinguished  from  the  Nicene,  were  already  extant  in  substance  under  different 
forms  (in  the  Symbolum  Epiphanii,  for  example,  and  the  SjTiib.  Basilii  Magui),  and 
took  shape  gradually  in  the  course  of  the  controversy.  It  is  striking  that  it  is  not 
mentioned  as  distinct  from  the  Nicene  by  Gregory  Nazianzen  in  his  Epist.  102  to 
Cledonius  (tom.  ii.  93  ed.  Paris.  1842),  nor  by  the  third  ecumenical  council  at  Ephe- 
sus.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was  twice  recited  at  the  council  of  Chalcedon,  twice  adopt- 
ed in  the  acts,  and  thus  solemnly  sanctioned.     Comp.  Hefele,  ii.  11,  12. 

^  Kai  is  wanting  in  Athanasius  (De  decretis,  etc.). 


668 


THIRD  PERIOD.   A.D.    311-590. 


Ty  yfj  •]  Tiiv  Bi  Tiixas  rovs  av^puirovs  koI 
5ia  TTjv  Tifierepav  crcoTTjpiav  Kar€?^6vTa 
Kol  aapKtti^ivra,  kolL  '  ^vav^ptaiz-riaavTa  • 
TrabSvTa  ^  Koi  avacFTOLVTa  tj7  rpirr)  rjfj.epa, 
aveX^Svra  els  tovs  ^  ovpavovs,*  €px6iJiivov 
Kplvai  C'i^i'Tas  Kol  veKpovs. 


Kai  (Is  TO  eiyiov  iriiivixa. 


eXbovra  e/c  tup  ohpavSiv,  Koi  crapKu- 
i&e'vTO  6/c  trvevfxaT 0%  ayiov  Ka\  Ma« 
plas  TTJs  Trap^euov,  koI  ivav^paiirr]- 
ffavTa '  cr avpciibiVT a  re  vnfpfjfMWv 
eirl  novriov  TltXaTov,  /col  ira^6v7a, 
K  al  r  a(p4vT a,  Kol  avaaTavra  t?)  Tpixjj 
;jU€/»a  Karhras  ypa<pa.s.,  Kol  aueX^ovTa 
els  TOVS  ovpavohs,  kuI  Kade^Sfievov 
6/c  Se^iwv  Tov  TTarphs,  Kal  iraXiv 
epx^ l^^vov  (leTo.  SJ|tjs  Kpluai  ^ccvras 
KOI  veKpovs  '  ov  Trjs  fiaff i\eias  ovk 
effTai  Te\os. 

Kal  els  Th  Tryevfjia  rh  aywy,  rh  kv- 
p lov,  rh  ^(aoiroih!/ ,  rh  e k  tov  ira- 
Tphs  iKVOpev6fiei/ov,Th<TvvTraTpl 
Ka\  vi<^  ■Kpoo'KVVOVfi.evov  Ka\  crvv- 
Bo^a^6iJ.evov ,  t})  KaKritrav  5ia  twv 
Trpotp7]Twv, — Ets  (/.iav  ayiav  Ka^o- 
AtK^v  Kal  airo  crroKiKijv  eK/cATj- 
aiav  '  6fio\oyovfjLev  ev  $dirT iff/xa 
els&(j>e(TtyaiJ.apTiuv'  irpoaSoKw- 
ixev  aydcTTacr IV  venpiav  Kal  ^u^v 
TOV  jxeWovTos  aid y OS.  'A/x-qv. 
[Toi/s   Se   \eyovras,  '6ti  ^  i^v  Trore  8t€ 

OVK  ^p  •    Kol '    irplv  yepprj^rjvat  ovk  rjv  • 

Koi  Stj  e|  OVK  ovTwp  eyeveTO  •  ^  e|  eTepas 

inrovTaffeus  ^  ovaias  *    <pd(TKOVTas    elvai ' 

i)   KTicrrbv,  f)   TpevThv,   ^    aWoiuThp   Thv 

vlhp  TOV  Qeov  *   ava^efxari^ei  t]  ayia  Kabo- 

\iKTj  Kal  airocno\iKri '  iKK'Kr,(xia.'\ 

"  We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  "  We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father 

Almighty,  Maker   of  all   things   visible  Almighty,  Maker  of  heaven  and  earthy 

and  invisible.  and  of  all  things  visible  and  invisible. 

"And  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  "And  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the 


'  Kai  is  wanting  in  Athanasius ;  Socrates  and  Gelasius  have  it. 

^  Gelasius  adds  Tacpivra,  buried. 

'  Without  the  article  in  Athanasius. 

*  Al.  Kal. 

^  Athanasius  omits  ort. 

'  Here  hypostasis  and  essence  are  still  used  interchangeably ;  though  Basil  and 
Bull  endeavor  to  prove  a  distinction.  Comp.  on  the  contrary,  Petavius,  De  trinit.  1. 
iv.  c.  1  (p.  314  sqq.).  Rufinus,  i.  6,  translates:  "Ex  alia  subsistentia  aut  substan 
tia." 

'  Athanasius  omits  ayia  and  aTroo-roAiKij,  Theodoret  has  both  predicates,  Socrates 
has  awoaroXiKri,  all  read  Kabo\iK-fi. 


i 


§   129.      THE  NICENE  AUD   CONSTANTINOPOLITAN  CREED.    669 


Son  of  God,  begotten  of  the  Father  [the 
only-begotten,  i.  c,  of  the  essence  of  the 
Father,  God  of  God,  and]  Light  of  Light, 
very  God  of  very  God,  begotten,  not 
made,  being  of  one  substance  with  the 
Father ;  by  whom  all  things  were  made 
[in  heaven  and  on  earth] ;  who  for  us 
men,  and  for  our  salvation,  came  down 
and  was  incarnate  and  was  made  man ; 
he  suffered,  and  the  third  day  he  rose 
again,  ascended  into  heaven ;  from  thence 
he  Cometh  to  judge  the  quick  and  the 
dead. 


"And  in  the  Holy  Ghost. 


["  And  those  who  say :  there  was  a 
time  when  he  was  not ;  and :  he  was  not 
before  he  was  made ;  and :  he  was  made 
out  of  nothing,  or  out  of  another  sub- 
stance or  thing,  or  the  Son  of  God  is 
created,  or  changeable,  or  alterable ; — 
they  are  condemned  by  the  holy  catholic 
and  apostoUc  church."] 


only-heyotten  Son  of  God,  begotten  of  the 
Father  before  all  worlds  (ceons),^  Light  of 
Light,  very  God  of  very  God,  begotten, 
not  made,  being  of  one  substance  with 
the  Father;  by  whom  all  things  were 
made  ;  who  for  us  men,  and  for  our  sal- 
vation, came  down  from  heaven^  and  was 
incarnate  by  the  Holy  Ghost  of  the  Vir- 
gin Mary,  and  was  made  man ;  he  was 
crucified  for  us  under  Pontius  Pilate,  and 
suffered,  and  was  buried,  and  the  third 
day  he  rose  again,  according  to  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  ascended  into  heaven,  and  sit- 
teth  on  the  right  hand  of  the  Father;  from 
thence  he  cometh  again,  with  glory,  to 
judge  the  quick  and  the  dead ;  whose 
kingdom  shall  have  no  enA? 

"  And  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  is  Lord 
and  Giver  of  life,  who  proceedeth  from 
the  Father,  who  with  the  Father  and  the 
Son  together  is  worshipped  and  glorified, 
who  spake  by  the  prophets, — In  one  holy 
catholic  and  apostolic  church;  we  acknow- 
ledge one  baptism  for  the  remission  of 
sins;  we  look  for  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead,  and  the  life  of  the  world  to  come. 
Ameny ' 


'  This  addition  appears  as  early  as  the  creeds  of  the  council  of  Antioch  in 
341. 

"  This  addition  likewise  is  found  substantially  in  the  Antiochian  creeds  of  341, 
and  is  directed  against  Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  SabeUius,  and  Paul  of  Samosata,  who 
taught  that  the  union  of  the  power  of  God  {ivepyeia  Spaa-TLKv)  with  the  man  Jesus 
will  cease  at  the  end  of  the  world,  so  that  the  Son  and  His  kingdom  are  not  eternal 
Comp.  Hefele,  i.  438  and  507  sq. 

^  Sunilar  additions  concerning  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  catholic  church,  baptism  and 
life  everlasting  are  found  in  the  older  symbols  of  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  Basil,  and  the 
two  Creeds  of  Epiphanius,  See  §  128  above,  and  Appendix  to  Pearson  on  the 
Creed,  p.  594  ff. 


670  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

A  carefal  comparison  shows  that  the  Constantinopolitan 
Creed  is  a  considerable  improvement  on  the  Nicene,  both  in 
its  omission  of  the  anathema  at  the  close,  and  in  its  addition  of 
the  articles  concerning  the  Holy  Ghost  and  concerning  the 
church  and  the  way  of  salvation.  The  addition:  according 
to  the  Scriptures,  is  also  important,  as  an  acknowledgment  of 
this  divine  and  infallible  guide  to  the  truth.  The  whole  is 
more  complete  and  symmetrical  than  the  Nicsenum,  and  in 
this  respect  is  more  like  the  Apostles'  Creed,  which,  in  like 
manner,  begins  with  the  creation  and  ends  with  the  resurrection 
and  the  life  everlasting,  and  is  disturbed  by  no  polemical 
dissonance ;  but  the  Apostles'  Creed  is  much  more  simple  in 
structure,  and  thus  better  adapted  to  the  use  of  a  congregation 
and  of  youth,  than  either  of  the  others. 

The  Constantinopolitan  Creed  maintained  itself  for  a  time 
by  the  side  of  the  Nicene,  and  after  the  council  of  Chalcedon 
in  451,  where  it  was  for  the  first  time  formally  adopted,  it 
gradually  displaced  the  other.  Since  that  time  it  has  itself 
commonly  borne  the  name  of  the  Nicene  Creed.  Tet  the 
original  Nicene  confession  is  still  in  use  in  some  schismatic 
sects  of  the  Eastern  church.  ^ 

The  Latin  church  adopted  the  improved  Nicene  symbol 
from  the  Greek,  but  admitted,  in  the  article  on  the  Holy 
Ghost,  the  further  addition  of  the  well-known  filioque,  which 
was  first  inserted  at  a  council  of  Toledo  in  589,  and  subse- 
quently gave  rise  to  bitter  disputes  between  the  two  churches. 


§  130.     The  Nicene  Doctrine  of  the  Trinity.     The 
Trinitarian  Terminology. 

The  doctrine  of  the  essential  deity  and  the  personality  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  completed  the  Nicene  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  ; 
and  of  this  doctrine  as  a  whole  we  can  now  take  a  closer  view. 

This  fundamental  and  comprehensive  dogma  secured  both 
the  unity  and  the  full  life  of  the  Christian  conception  of  God ; 
and  in  this  respect  it  represents,  as  no  other  dogma  does,  the 
whole  of  Christianity.     It  forms  a  bulwark  against  heathen 


§    130.      THE   NICENE   DOCTRmE   OF   THE   TRINITY.  671 

polytheism  on  the  one  hand,  and  Jewish  deism  and  abstract 
monotheism  on  the  other.  It  avoids  the  errors  and  combines 
the  truth  of-^hese  two  opposite  conceptions.  Against  the 
pagans,  says  Gi'ftigory  of  Nyssa,  we  hold  the  unity  of  essence ; 
against  the  Jews,  the  distinction  of  hypostases.  "We  do  not 
reject  all  multiplicity,  but  only  such  as  destroys  the  unity  of 
the  being,  like  the  pagan.polytheism ;  no  more  do  we  reject  all 
unity,  but  only  such  uni^  as  denies  diversity  and  full  vital 
action.  The  orthodox  docti^e  of  the  Trinity,  furthermore, 
formed  the  true  mean  betweeii  Sabellianism  and  tatheism, 
both  of  which  taught  a  divine  tria(L  but  at  the  expense*,  in  the 
one  case,  of  the  personal  distinctiOijs,  in  the  other,  of  the 
essential  unity.  It  exerted  a  wholesom"»^regulative  influence 
on  the  other  dogmas.  It  overcame  all  theories  of  emanation, 
established  the  Clmstian  conception  of  creation  by  a  strict 
distinction  of  that  which  proceeds  from  the  essence  of  God, 
and  is  one  with  him,  like  the  Son  and  the  Spirit,  from  that 
which  arises  out  of  nothing  by  the  free  will  of  God,  and  is  of 
different  substance.  It  provided  for  an  activity  and  motion  of 
knowledge  and  love  in  the  divine  essence,  without  the  Origen- 
istic  hypothesis  of  an  eternal  creation.  And  by  the  assertion 
of  the  true  deity  of  the  Redeemer  and  the  Sanctifier,  it  secured 
the  divine  character  of  the  work  of  redemption  and  sanc- 
tification. 

Tlie  l^icene  fathers  did  not  pretend  to  have  exhausted  the 
mystery  of  the  Trinity,  and  very  well  understood  that  all 
human  knowledge,  especially  in  this  deepest,  central  dogma, 
proves  itself  but  fragmentary.  All  speculation  on  divine 
things  ends  in  a  mystery,  and  reaches  an  inexplicable  res- 
idue, before  which  the  thinking  mind  must  bow  in  humble 
devotion.  "Man,"  says  Athanasius,  "can  perceive  only  the 
hem  of  the  garment  of  the  triune  God ;  the  cherubim  cover  the 
rest  with  their  wings."  In  his  letter  to  the  Monks,  written 
about  358,  he  confesses  that  the  fm-ther  he  examines,  the  more 
the  mystery  eludes  his  understanding,'  and  he  exclaims  with 
the  Psalmist :     "  Such  knowledge  is  too  wonderful  for  me  ;  it 

*  Ep.  ad  Monachos  (Opera,  torn.  i.  p.  343). 


672 


THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


% 


L 


1 


i^>. 


Y4il 

r 


^ 


(S^,X 


is  liiglij  I  cannot  attain  unto  it."  *  Augustine  says  in  one 
;^lace  :  "  If  we  be  asked  to  define  the  Trinity,  we  caj^only  say, 
I  it  is  not  tlds  or  that.''  *  But  though  we  cannot  e^ffl&m  the  how 
I  or  why  of  our  fai^,  still  the  Christian  may  ^row,  and  should 
know,  what  he  Jtfelieves,  and  what  he  doifs  not  believe,  and 
should  be  persidaded  of  the  facts  and  iniths  which  form  the 
matter  of  hi0'aith.-S^ 

The  ess^tial  points  of  the  orth/Qox  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
are  these/ 

1.  IJaere  is  only  one  diYin^ essence  or  substance.^  Father, 
Son,  md  Spirit  are  one  iH^ssence,  or  consubstantial.*  They 
are  in  one  another,  insepm"able,  and  cannot  be  conceived  with- 
out each  other.  In^i^s  point  the  Nicene  doctrine  is  thorough- 
ly monotheistic  or  monarchian,  in  distinction  from  tritheism, 
which  is  but  a  new  form  of  the  polytheism  of  the  pagans. 

The  terms  essence  (ovaia)  and  nature  {j>vai<i\  in  the  philo- 
sophical sense,  denote  not  an  individual,  a  personality,  but  the 
genus  or  species  /  not  unurn  in  numero,  but  ens  UQium  in 
multis.  All  men  are  of  the  same  substance,  partake  of  the 
same  human  nature,  though  as  persons  and  individuals  they 
are  very  different.^  The  term  Jiomoousion,  in  its  strict  gram- 
matical sense,  differs  from  monoousion  or  toutoousion^  as  well 
as  from  heteroousion,  and  signifies  not  numerical  identity,  but 
equality  of  essence  or  community  of  nature  among  several 
beings.  It  is  clearly  used  thus  in  the  Chalcedonian  symbol, 
where  it  is  said  that  Christ  is  "  consubstantial  {hamoousios) 
with  the  Father  as  touching  the  Godhead,  and  consubstantial 

^^arrat.  in  Ps.  xxvi.  8'  '^John~I)amascenus  (Expos,  fidei)  almost  reaches  the 
Socratic  confession,  when  he  says :  All  we  can  know  concerning  the  divine  nature  is, 
that  it  cannot  be  conceived.  Of  course,  such  concessions  are  to  be  under^Jtood  cum 
grano  salts. 

V  ^  Ovaia,  substantia,  essentia,  (pvcris,  natura,  rh  ov,  rh  inruKeifxevoy.  Comp.  Peta- 
■rius,  De  Trinitate,  lib.  iv.  c.  1  (ed.  Par.  torn.  ii.  p.  311):  "Christiani  scriptores  .  .  . 
ovalav  appellant  non  singularem  individuamque,  sed  communem  individuis  substan- 
tiam."     The  word  viTOKflfj.eyoy,  however,  is  sometimes  taken  as  equivalent  to  Trpi^o-oi- 


;'     *  '0/j.oov(Tioi.     On  the  import  of  this,  comp,  §  127,  and  in  the  text  above. 

'  "  We  men,"  says  Athanasius,  "  consisting  of  body  and  soul,  are  all  fiias  cpvtrfws 
Ka\  ovcias,  but  many  persons." 


e^^^f^.  yi^U^  t/tl»^U-m.y 


^■^  Y^ 


i^tZ^te^  yto^t^  fVL 


\^x 


I 


m\ 


§    130.       THE   ISnCENE   DOCTEINE   OF   THE   TRINITY.  673 

with  Hs  [and  yet  individually  distinct  from  ns]  as  touching 
the  manhood."  The  Nicene  Creed  does  not  expressly  assert 
the  singleness  or  numerical  unity  of  the  divine  essence 
(unless  it  be  in  the  first  article :  "  We  believe  in  one  God  ") ; 
and  the  main  point  with  the  Nicene  fathers  was  to  urge  against 
Arianism  the  strict  divinity  and  essential  equality  of  the  Son 
and  Holy  Ghost  with  the  Father.  If  we  press  the  difference 
of  homoousion  from  monoousion,  and  overlook  the  many  pas- 
sages in  which  they  assert  with  equal  emphasis  the  monarchia 
or  numerical  unity  of  the  Godhead,  we  must  charge  them  with 
tritheism.^ 

But  in  the  divine  Trinity  consubstantiality  denotes  not  only 
sameness  of  kind,  but  at  the  same  time  numerical  unity ;  not 
merely  the  unum  in  sjpecie,  but  also  the  U7ium  in  numero.  The 
three  persons  are  related  to  the  divine  substance  not  as  three 
individuals  to  their  species,  as  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  or 
Peter,  John,* and  Paul,  to  human  nature;  they  are  only  one 
God.  The  divine  substance  is  absolutely  indivisible  by  reason 
of  its  simplicity,  and  absolutely  inextensible  and  untransferable 
by  reason  of  its  infinity ;  whereas  a  corporeal  substance  can  be 
divided,  and  the  human  nature  can  be  multiplied  by  genera- 
tion. Three  divine  substances  would  limit  and  exclude  each 
other,  and  therefore  could  not  be  infinite  or  absolute.  The 
whole  fulness  of  the  one  undivided  essence  of  God,  with  all  its 
attributes,  is  in  all  the  persons  of  the  Trinity,  though  in  each 
in  his  own  way :  in  the  Father  as  original  principle,  in  the 
Son  by  eternal  generation,  in  the  Spirit  by  eternal  procession. 
The  church  teaches  not  one  divine  essence  and  three  persons, 
but  one  essence  in  three  persons.  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit 
cannot  be  conceived  as  three  separate  individuals,  but  are  in 
one  another,  and  form  a  solid aric  unity.^ 

# 

*  Cudworth  (in  his  great  work  on  the  Intellectual  System  of  the  Universe,  toI.  ii. 
p.  43*7  fF.)  elaborately  endeavors  to  show  that  Athanasius  and  the  Nicene  fathers 
actually  taught  three  divine  substances  in  the  order  of  subordination.  But  he  makes 
no  account  of  the  fact  that  the  terminology  and  the  distinction  of  ovaia  and  vtt&- 
CTTacTts  were  at  that  time  not  yet  clearly  settled. 

°  Comp.  the  passages  from  Athanasius  and  other  fathers  cited  at  §  126.  "The 
Persons  of  the  Trinity,"  says  R.  Hooker  (Eccles.  Polity,  B.  v.  ch.  56,  vol.  ii.  p.  315 
VOL.  II. — 43 


674  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Many  passages  of  tlie  l^icene  fathers  have  unquestionably 
a  tritheistic  sound,  but  are  neutralized  by  others  which  by 
themselves  may  bear  a  Sabeilian  construction ;  so  that  their 
position  must  be  regarded  as  midway  between  these  two 
extremes.  Subsequently  John  Philoponus,  an  Aristotelian  and 
Monophysite  in  Alexandria  about  the  middle  of  the  sixth 
century,  was  charged  with  tritlieism,  because  he  made  no 
distinction  between  (fiva-L<;  and  viroaraaa,  and  reckoned  in  the 
Trinity  three  natures,  substances,  and  deities,  according  to  the 
number  of  persons.' 

in  Keble's  edition),  quite  in  the  spirit  of  the  Nicene  orthodoxy,  "  are  not  three  partic- 
ular substances  to  whom  one  general  nature  is  common,  but  three  that  subsist  by 
one  substance  wMch  itself  is  particular :  yet  they  all  three  have  it,  and  their  several 
ways  of  having  it  are  that  which  makes  their  personal  distinction.  The  Father 
therefore  is  m  the  Son,  and  the  Son  in  Him,  they  both  in  the  Spirit  and  the  Spirit  in 
both  them.  So  that  the  Father's  offspring,  which  is  the  Son,  remaiueth  eternally  in 
the  Father;  the  Father  eternally  also  in  the  Son,  no  way  severed  or  divided  by 
reason  of  the  sole  and  single  unity  of  their  substance.  The  Son  in  the  Father  as 
hght  in  that  light  out  of  which  it  floweth  without  separation ;  the  Father  in  the  Son 
as  light  in  that  hght  which  it  causeth  and  leaveth  not.  And  because  in  this  respect 
his  eternal  being  is  of  the  Father,  which  eternal  being  is  his  hfe,  therefore  he  by  the 
Father  Uveth."  In  a  similar  strain,  Cunningham  says  in  his  exposition  of  the  Nicene 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity  (Hist.  Theology,  i.  p.  285) :  "  The  unity  of  the  divine  nature 
as  distinguished  from  the  nature  of  a  creature,  might  be  only  a  specific  and  not  a 
numerical  unity,  and  this  nature  might  be  possessed  by  more  than  one  divine  being ; 
but  the  Scriptures  plainly  ascribe  a  numerical  unity  to  the  Supreme  Being,  and,  of 
course,  preclude  the  idea  that  there  are  several  different  beings  who  are  possessed 
of  the  one  divine  nature.  This  is  virtually  the  same  thing  as  teaching  us  that  the 
one  divine  nature  is  possessed  only  by  one  essence  or  substance,  from  which  the 
conclusion  is  clear,  that  if  the  Father  be  possessed  of  the  divine  nature,  and  if  the 
Son,  with  a  distinct  personality,  be  also  possessed  of  the  divine  nature,  the  Father 
and  the  Son  must  be  of  one  and  the  same  substance  ;  or  rather — for  it  can  scarcely 
with  propriety  be  called  a  conclusion  or  consequence — the  doctrine  of  the  consub- 
stantiality  of  the  Son  with  the  Father  is  just  an  expression  or  embodiment  of  the  one 
great  truth,  the  different  component  parts  of  which  are  each  estabUshed  by  scriptural 
authority,  viz. :  that  the  Fathered  the  Son,  having  distinct  personality  in  the  imity 
of  the  Godhead,  are  both  equally  possessed  of  the  divine,  as  distinguished  from  the 
created,  nature.  Before  any  creature  existed,  or  had  been  produced  by  God  out  of 
nothing,  the  Son  existed  in  the  possession  of  the  divine  nature.  If  this  be  true,  and 
if  it  be  also  true  that  God  is  in  any  sense  one,  then  it  is  likewise  true — for  this  is 
just  according  to  the  established  meaning  of  words,  the  current  mode  of  expressing 
it — that  the  Father  and  the  Son  are  the  same  in  substance  as  well  as  equal  in  power 
and  glory." 

'  On  tritheism,  and  the  doctrine  of  John  Philoponus  and  John  Ascusnages, 


§   130.      THE   NICENE  DOCTRINE   OF  THE   TPJXITY.  675 

2,  In  tliis  one  divine  essence  there  are  tliree  persons '  or,  to 
use  a  better  terra,  hypostases^  tliat  is,  tliree  different  modes  of 

■which  is  known  to  us  only  in  fragments,  comp.  especially  Baur,  Lehre  von  der  Drei- 
einigkeit,  etc.,  vol.  ii.  pp.  13-32.  In  the  English  Church  the  error  of  tritheism  was 
revived  by  Dean  Sherlock  in  his  "  Vindication  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Holy  and  ever 
Blessed  Trinity,"  1690.  He  maintained  that,  with  the  exception  of  a  mutual  con- 
sciousness of  each  other,  which  no  created  spirits  can  have,  the  three  divine  persons 
are  "three  distinct  infinite  minds"  or  "three  intelligent  beings."  He  was  opposed 
by  South,  Walhs,  and  others.  See  Patrick  FairbaLm's  Appendix  to  the  English 
translation  of  Dorner's  History  of  Chiistology,  vol.  iii.  p.  35-4  fF.  (Edinbu.^h, 
1863). 

^  ripo'o-ajTra,  personce.  This  term  occurs  very  often  in  the  New  Testament,  now 
in  the  sense  oi  person,  now  oi  face  or  countenance,  again  of  form  or  external  appear- 
ance. Etymologically  (from  Trpo't  and  t]  id\f/,  the  eye,  face),  it  means  strictly  face; 
then  in  general,  fro/it;  also  mask,  visor,  character  (of  a  drama) ;  and  finally,  person, 
in  the  grammatical  sense.  In  hke  manner  the  Latin  word  persona  (from  sonus, 
sound)  signifies  the  mask  of  the  Roman  actor,  through  which  he  made  himself  audi- 
hle  (personuit) ;  then  the  actor  himself ;  then  any  assumed  or  real  character;  and 
finally  an  individual,  a  reasonable  being.  Sabellianism  used  the  word  in  the  sense 
of  face  or  character ;  tritheism,  in  the  grammatical  sense.  Owing  to  this  ambiguity 
of  the  word,  the  term  hypostasis  is  to  be  preferred,  though  this  too  is  somewhat  in- 
adequate. Comp.  the  Lexicons,  and  especially  Petavius,  De  trinit.,  hb.  iv.  Dr.  Shedd 
also  prefers  hypostasis,  and  observes,  vol.  i.  p.  371 :  "  This  term  {persona),  it  is 
obvious  to  remark,  though  the  more  common  one  in  English,  and  perhaps  in  Prot- 
estant trinitarianism  generally,  is  not  so  well  adapted  to  express  the  conception 
intended,  as  the  Greek  inroa-Taa-is.  It  has  a  Sabellian  leaning,  because  it  does  not 
with  sufficient  plainness  indicate  the  subsidence  in  the  Essence.  The  Father,  Son, 
and  Spirit  are  more  than  mere  aspects  or  appearances  of  the  Essence.  The  Latin 
persona  was  the  mask  worn  by  the  actor  in  the  play,  and  was  representative  of  his 
particular  character  for  the  particular  time.  Now,  although  those  who  employed 
these  terms  undoubtedly  gave  them  as  full  and  solid  a  meaning  as  they  could,  and 
were  imdoubtedly  true  trinitarians,  yet  the  representation  of  the  eternal  and  neces- 
sary hypostatical  distinctions  in  the  Godhead,  by  terms  derived  from  transitory 
scenical  exhibitions,  was  not  the  best  for  purposes  of  science,  even  though  the  pov- 
erty of  human  language  should  justify  their  employment  for  popular  and  illustrative 
statements." 

*  'XTTOdrdaeis,  subsistentice.  Comp.  Heb.  i.  3.  (The  other  passages  of  the  Xew 
Testament  where  the  word  is  used,  Heb.  iii.  14;  xi.  1 ;  2  Cor.  ix.  4;  xi.  17,  do  not 
belong  here.)  "i'xoaracnv,  and  the  corresponding  Latin  substantia,  strictly  founda- 
tion, then  essence,  suhstaiice,  is  originally  pretty  much  synonymous  with  ohaia, 
essentia,  and  is  in  fact,  as  we  have  already  said,  frequently  interchanged  with  it, 
even  by  Athanasius,  and  in  the  anathema  at  the  close  of  the  original  Nicene  Creed. 
But  gradually  (according  to  Petavius,  after  the  council  at  Alexandria  in  362)  a  dis- 
tinction estabHshed  itself  in  the  church  terminology,  in  which  Gregory  of  Nyssa, 
particiilarly  in  his  work:  De  differentia  essentiae  et  hypostaseos  (torn.  iii.  p.  32  sqq.) 
had  an  important  influence.     Comp.  Petavius,  1.  c.  p.  314  sqq. 


676  THERD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

subsistence '  of  tlie  one  same  undivided  and  indivisible  whole, 
■which  in  the  Scriptures  are  called  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the 
Holy  Ghost.''  These  distinctions  are  not  merely  different  attri- 
butes, powers,  or  activities  of  the  Godhead,  still  less  merely 
subjective  aspects  under  which  it  presents  itself  to  the  human 
mind ;  but  each  person  expresses  the  whole  fulness  of  the 
divine  being  with  all  its  attributes,  and  the  three  persons  stand 
in  a  relation  of  mutual  knowledge  and  love.  The  Father 
communicates  his  very  life  to  the  Son,  and  the  Spirit  is  the 
bond  of  union  and  communion  between  the  two.  The  Son 
speaks,  and  as  the  God-Man,  even  prays,  to  the  Father,  thus 
standing  over  against  him  as  a  first  person  towards  a  second  ; 
and  calls  the  Holy  Ghost  "  another  Comforter  "  whom  he  will 
send  from  the  Father,  thus  speaking  of  him  as  of  a  third 
person.^ 

Here  the  orthodox  doctrine  forsook  Sabellianism  or  modal- 
ism,  which,  it  is  true,  made  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit  strictly 
coordinate,  but  only  as  different  denominations  and  forms  of 
manifestation  of  the  one  God. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  as  we  have  already  intimated,  the 
term  person  must  not  be  taken  here  in  the  sense  current  among 
men,  as  if  the  three  persons  were  three  dijfferent  individuals,  or 
three  self-conscious  and  separately  acting  beings.  The  trini- 
tarian  idea  of  personality  lies  midway  between  that  of  a  mere 

•  TpoTToi  virdp^ius,  an  expression,  however,  capable  of  a  Sabellian  sense. 

-  This  question  of  the  <j-2-personality  of  God  must  not  be  confounded  with  the 
modem  question  of  the  personality  of  God  in  general.  The  tii-personality  was 
asserted  by  the  Nicene  fathers  in  opposition  to  abstract  monarchianism  and  Sabel- 
lianism ;  the  personality  is  asserted  by  Christian  theism  against  pantheism,  which 
makes  a  personal  relation  of  the  spirit  of  man  to  God  impossible.  Schleiermacher, 
who  as  a  philosopher  leaned  decidedly  to  pantheism,  admitted  (in  a  note  to  his 
Reden  iiber  die  Religion)  that  devotion  and  prayer  always  presume  and  require  the 
personality  of  God.  The  philosophical  objection,  that  personality  necessarily 
includes  limitation  by  other  personalities,  and  so  contradicts  the  notion  of  the 
absoluteness  of  God,  is  untenable ;  for  we  can  as  well  conceive  an  absolute  personal- 
ity, as  an  absolute  intelligence  and  an  absolute  will,  to  which,  however,  the  power 
of  self-limitation  must  be  ascribed,  not  as  a  weakness,  but  as  a  perfection.  The 
orthodox  tri-personaUty  does  not  conflict  with  this  total  personality,  but  gives  it  full 
organic  life. 

'  John  xiv.  16:  "AWov  TrapaKXrirov,  comp.  v.  26;  C.  xv.  26:  'O  ■napdK\r]Toi,  iv 
iyu)  ven^u  iifxlv  irapa  Trarpoy, — a  clear  distinction  of  Spirit,  Son,  and  Father. 


U-J' 


§   130.      THE   NICENE   DOCTRINE   OF   THE   TEINITY.  67T 

form  of  manifestation,  or  a  personation,  which  would  lead  to 
Sabellianism,  and  the  idea  of  an  independent,  limited  human 
personality,  which  would  result  in  tritheism.  In  other  words, 
it  avoids  the  raonoousian  or  unitarian  trinitj  of  a  threefold 
conception  and  aspect  of  one  and  the  same  being,  and  the 
triousian  or  tritheistic  trinity  of  three  distinct  and  separate 
beings.'  In  each  person  there  is  the  same  inseparable  divine 
substance,  united  with  the  individual  property  and  relation 
which  distinguishes  that  person  from  the  others.  The  word 
person  is  in  reality  only  a  make-shift,  in  the  absence  of  a  more  - 
adequate  term.  Our  idea  of  God  is  more  tiiie  and  deep  than 
our  terminology,  and  the  essence  and  character  of  God  far 
transcends  our  highest  ideas.* 

The  Nicene  fathers  and  Augustine  endeavored,  as  Tertullian 
and  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  had  abeady  done,  to  illustrate  the 
Trinity  by  analogies  from  created  existence.  Their  figures 
were  sun,  ray.  and  light ;  fountain,  stream,  and  flow  ;   root,       * 

'  Comp.  Petavius,  1.  c,  who  discusses  very  fully  the  trinitarian  termmology  of 
the  Nicene  fathers.  Also  J.  H.  Xewman,  The  Arians,  etc.  p.  208 :  "  The  word 
person,  which  we  venture  to  use  in  speaking  of  those  three  distinct  manifestations 
of  Himself,  which  it  has  pleased  Almighty  God  to  give  us,  is  in  its  philosophical 
sense  too  wide  for  our  meaning.  Its  essential  signification,  as  applied  to  ourselves, 
is  that  of  an  individual  inielligerd  agent,  answering  to  the  Greek  inroaTaais,  or  reali- 
ty. On  the  other  hand,  if  we  restrict  it  to  its  etymological  sense  o? persona  or  Trpt^o-- 
biTTov,  i.  €.,  character,  it  evidently  means  less  than  Scripture  doctrine,  which  we 
wish  to  ascertain  by  it ;  denoting  merely  certain  outward  expressions  of  the  Supreme 
Being  relatively  to  ourselves,  which  are  of  an  accidental  and  variable  nature.  The 
statements  of  Revelation  then  lie  between  this  internal  and  external  view  of  the 
Divine  Essence,  between  Tritheism,  and  what  is  popularly  called  Unitarianism." 
Dr.  Shedd,  History  of  Christian  Doctrine,  vol.  i.  p.  365 :  "  The  doctrine  of  a  sub- 
sistence in  the  substance  of  the  Godhead  brings  to  view  a  species  of  existence  that 
is  90  anomalous  and  unique,  that  the  human  mind  derives  little  or  no  aid  from  those 
analogies  which  assist  it  in  all  other  cases.  The  hypostasis  is  a  real  subsistence, — a 
solid  essential  form  of  'existence,  and  not  a  mere  emanation,  or  energy,  or  manifesta- 
tion,— but  it  is  intermediate  between  substance  and  attributes.  It  is  not  identical 
with  the  substance,  for  there  are  not  three  substances.  It  is  not  identical  with  attri- 
butes, for  the  three  Persons  each  and  equally  possess  all  the  divine  attributes.  .  .  . 
Hence  the  human  mind  is  called  upon  to  grasp  the  notion  of  a  species  of  existence  '•"».•..... 
that  is  totally  sui  generis,  and  not  capable  of  illustration  by  any  of  the  ordinary 
comparisons  and  analogies." 

*  As  Augustine  says,  De  trinitate,  lib.  vii.  cap.  4  (§  7,  ed.  Bened.  Yenet.  torn.       /y 
viii.  fol.  858) :  "  Verius  cogitatur  Deus  quam  dicitur,  et  verius  est  quam  cogitatur,"  .    J\ff  §  /ltf/«* 


678  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

stem,  and  fruit ;  the  colors  of  tlie  rainbow ; '  soul,  thought,  and 
spirit ;  ^  memory,  intelligence,  and  will ; '  and  the  idea  of  love, 
which  affords  the  best  illustration,  for  God  is  love/  Such 
figures  are  indeed  confessedly  insufficient  as  proofs,  and,  if 
pressed,  might  easily  lead  to  utterly  erroneous  conceptiqns. 
For  example :  sun,  ray,  and  light  are  not  co-ordinate,  but  the 
two  latter  are  merely  qualities  or  emanations  of  the  first. 
"Omne  simile  claudicat."^  Analogies,  however,  here  do  the 
negative  service  of  repelling  the  charge  of  unreasonableness 
from  a  doctrine  which  is  in  fact  the  highest  reason,  and  which 
has  been  acknowledged  in  various  forms  by  the  greatest  philoso- 
phers, from  Plato  to  Schelling  and  Hegel,  though  often  in  an 
entirely  unscriptural  sense.  A  certain  trinity  undeniably  runs 
through  all  created  life,  and  is  especially  reflected  in  manifold 
ways  in  man,  who  is  created  after  the  image  of  God ;  in  the 
relation  of  body,  soul,  and  spirit ;  in  the  faculties  of  thought, 
feeling,  and  will ;  in  the  nature  of  self-consciousness ; '  and  in  the 
nature  of  love/ 

■  Used  by  Basil  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa. 
♦  ^  "^vxh,  eV^y^Tjo-ir,  TTvevjj.a,  in  Gregory  Nazianzen. 

'  Augustine,  De  trinit.  x.  c.  11  (§  18),  torn.  viii.  fol.  898 :  "  Haec  tria,  memoria,  in- 
telligentia,  voluntas,  quoniam  non  sunt  tres  vitse,  sed  una  vita,  nee  tres  mentes,  sed 
una  mens :  consequenter  utique  non  tres  substantias  sunt,  sed  una  substantia." 

*  Augustine,  ib.  viii.  8  (f.  875):  "Immo  vero  vides  trinitatem,  si  caritatem 
vides ;  "  ix.  2  (f.  879) :  "  Tria  sunt,  amans,  et  quod  amatur,  et  amor."  And  in  an- 
other place :  "  Tres  sunt,  amans,  amatus,  et  mutuus  amor." 

*  This  was  clearly  felt  and  confessed  by  the  fathers  themselves,  who  used  these 
illustrations  merely  as  helps  to  their  understanding.  Joh.  Damascenus  (De  fide 
orthod.  1.  i.  c.  8 ;  Opera,  tom.  i.  p.  137)  says:  "It  is  impossible  for  any  image  to 
be  found  in  created  things,  representing  in  itself  the  nature  of  the  Holy  Trinity 
without  any  point  of  dissimilitude.  For  can  a  thing  created,  and  compound,  and 
changeable,  and  circumscribed,  and  corruptible,  clearly  express  tlie  superesscntial 
divine  essence,  which  is  exempt  from  all  these  defects  ?  "  Comp.  Mosheim's  notes 
to  Cudworth,  vol.  ii.  422  f.  (Lond.  ed.  of  1845)^  »4»4f  e4/te^'aJt^  /=* 

^  The  trinity  of  self-consciousness  consists  in  a  process  of  becoming  objective  to 
one's  self,  and  knowing  one's  self  in  this  objectivity,  according  to  the  logical  law  of 
/]  thesis,  antithesis,  and  synthesis,  or  in  the  unity  of  the  subject  thinking  and  the  sub- 

JlCfljjuC^  ject  thought.  This  speculative  argument  has  been  developed  by  Leibnitz, ^legel, 
and  other  German  philosophers,  and  is  adopted  also  by  Dr.  Shedd,  Hist,  of  Chris- 
tian Doct.  i.  p.  SCO  ff.,  note.  But  this  analogy  properly  leads  at  best  only  to  a 
Sabellian  tri-personality,  not  to  the  orthodox.. 

'  The  ethical  induction  of  the  Trinity  from  the  idea  of  love  was  first  attempted 


§   130.       THE   NICENE   DOCTEINE   OF   THE   TEINITY.  679 

3.  Each  divine  person  has  his,  ;property^  as  it  ^vere  a  char- 
acteristic individuality,  expressed  by  the  Greek  word  I8i6r7]<i,^ 
and  the  Latm prqprietas.^  This  is  not  to  be  confounded  with 
attribute  ;  for  the  divine  attributes,  eternity,  omnipresence, 
omnipotence,  wisdom,  hohness,  love,  etc.,  are  inherent  in  the 
divine  essence,  and  are  the  common  possession  of  all  the  divine 
hypostases.  The  icliotes,  on  the  contrary,  is  a  peculiarity  of 
the  hyj)ostas{s,  and  therefore  cannot  be  communicated  or  trans- 
ferred from  one  to  another. 

To  the  first  person  fatherhood,  or  the  being  unbegotten,^  is 
ascribed  as  liis  property ;  to  the  second,  sonship,  or  the  being 
begotten ;  *  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  procession."  In  other  words : 
The  Father  is  unbegotten,  but  begetting ;  the  Son  is  uncreated, 
but  begotten ;  the  Holy  Ghost  proceeds  from  the  Father  (and, 
according  to  the  Latin  doctrine,  also  from  the  Son).  But 
these  distinctions  relate,  as  we  have  said,  only  to  the  hyposta- 
ses, and  have  no  force  with  respect  to  the  divine  essence  which 
is  the  same  in  all,  and  neither  begets  nor  is  begotten,  nor 
proceeds,  nor  is  sent. 

4.  The  divine  persons  are  in  one  another,  mutually  inter- 
penetrate,  and    form   a  pei'petual    intercomnmnication  and 

by  Augustine,  and  has  more  recently  been  pursued  by  Sartorius,  J.  Miiller,  J.  P. 
Lange,  Martensen,  Liebner,  Schoberlein,  and  others.  It  is  suggested  by  the  moral 
essence  of  God,  which  is  love,  the  relation  of  the  Father  to  the  Son,  and  the  "fel- 
lowship "  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  it  undoubtedly  contains  a  deep  element  of  truth ; 
but,  strictly  taken,  it  yields  only  two  different  personalities  and  an  impersonal  rela- 
tion, thus  proving  too  much  for  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and  too  little  for  the  Holy 
Spirit.  ,^ 

'  Also  X^iov.     Gregory  of  Xyssa  calls  these  characteristic  distinctions  ■yvupLffriKai 
tSioTTjrey,  peculiar  marks  of  recognition.    The  terms  jSiottjs  and  vTrdaraais  were 
sometimes  used  synonymously.     The  word  iSioTr/r,  fern,  (from  IfSios),  peculianty,  is  of 
course  not  to  be  confounded  with  (Sjcottj?,  mase. /which  likewise  comes  from  iSior,     '/j^.  ^^^v* 
but  means  a  private  man,  then  layman,  then  an  imbecile,  idiot.  .^ci*>ta  '*•  "^^ 

*  Proprietas  personalis  ;  also  character  hypostaiicus. 
'  ' h-yivv-qsia,  paternitas. 

*  Tevvr]<jia,  yivvt]cns,  ge^ieratio,  filiatio.  UrvA'r*,  ^^'vr/k- 

*  ^EKiropevffis,  processio  ;  also  eKTre/x^lits,  missio  ;  both  from  John  xv.  15  (TreVi^oc         ,^^i^riyj,       '' 
.  .  .  iKTropeverai)  and  similar  passages,  which  relate,  however,  not  to  the  eternal 

trinity  of  constitution,  but  to  the  historical  trinity  of  manifestation.  Gregory  Xazi- 
anzen  says:    "'iSiOj'  irarpiy  fiev  tj   oyeyvTjo'io,   vlov   Se   ^   yevfijcTts,   irvevfxaTos   Se  rj 


/^  (au>  tii^^^^ 


680  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

motion  within  the  divine  essence  ;  as  the  Lord  sajs :  "  I  am 
in  the  Father,  and  the  Father  in  me  ; "  and  "  the  Father  that 
dwelleth  in  me,  he  doeth  the  works."  '  This  perfect  indwelling 
and  vital  communion  was  afterwards  designated  (by  John  of 
Damascus  and  the  scholastics)  bj  such  terms  as  ivv7Tap^c<;, 
7rept;^ot)p77c7i9/^  inexistentia,  immanentia,  inhabiiatio,  circulation 
permeatio,  intercommunion  circumincessio.^^o^  tviti^iiJ^o^i^^ 
5.  The  Nicene  doctrine  already  contains,  in  substance,  a 
distinction  between  two  trinities  :  an  immanent  trinity  of  con- 
stitution,* which  existed  from  eternity^  and  an  economic  trinity 
of  manifestation ;  ^  though  this  distinction  did  not  receive 
formal  expression  till  a  much  later  period.  For  the  generation 
of  the  Son  and  the  procession  of  the  Sj^irit  are,  according  to 
the  doctrine,  an  eternal  process.  The  perceptions  and  practi- 
cal wants  of  the  Christian  mind  start,  strictly  speaking,  with 
the  trinity  of  revelation  in  the  threefold  ^progressive  work  of 
the   creation,  the   redemption,   and   the  preservation   of  the 

'  John  xiv.  10:  'O  Se  Trarrjp  6  iv  i/A.ol  jx4vu>u,  ain'os  ttouI  to.  ^pya;  v.  11; 
'E76b  iv  r^  TTOTpl,  Koi  6  iraTTjp  eV  iiioi.  This  also  refers,  strictly,  not  to  the  eternal 
relation,  but  to  the  indwelling  of  the  Father  in  the  historical,  incarnate  Christ. 

^  From  irepix^P^o'  (with  els),  to  circulate,  go  about,  progredi,  amhulare.  Comp. 
Petavius,  De  trinit.,  hb.  iv.  c.  16  (torn.  ii.  p.  453  sqq.),  and  De  incarnatione,  lib.  iv. 
c.  14  (torn.  iv.  p.  473  sqq.).  The  thing  itself  is  clearly  taught  even  by  the  Nicene 
fathers,  especially  by  Athanasius  in  his  third  Oration  against  the  Arians,  c.  3  sqq., 
and  elsewhere,  with  reference  to  the  relation  of  the  Son  to  the  Father,  although  he 
never,  so  far  as  I  know,  used  the  word  irepixdp'n'Ti.s.  Gregory  Nazianzen  uses  the 
verb  trepixopeip  (not  the  noun)  of  the  vital  interpenetration  of  the  two  natures  in 
Christ.  Gibbon,  in  his  contemptuous  account  of  the  Xicene  controversy  (chapter 
xxi.)  calls  the  iTepix<ipi)<yis  or  circumincessio  "the  deepest  and  darkest  corner  of  the 
whole  theological  abyss,"  but  takes  no  pains  even  to  explain  this  idea.  The  old  . 
Protestant  theologians  defined  the  Trepixci/zT/tr/r  as  "immanentia,  h.  e.  inexistentia 
mutua  et  singularissima,  intima  et  perfectissima  inhabitatio  unius  persons  in  aha." 
Comp.  Joh.  Gerhard,  Loci  theologici,  torn.  i.  p.  197  (ed.  Cotta). 

'  From  incedo,  denoting  the  perpetual  internal  motion  of  the  Trinity,  the  circum- 
fusio  or  mutua  commeatio,  et  communicatio  personarum  inter  se.  Petavius  (in  the 
2d  and  4th  vol.  1.  c),  Cudworth  (Intellectual  System  of  the  Universe,  vol.  ii.  p.  454, 
ed.  of  Harrison,  Lond.  1845),  and  others  use  instead  of  this,  circuminsessio,  from. 
sedeo,  which  rather  expresses  the  repose  of  the  persons  in  one  another,  the  inex- 
istentia or  mutua  existentia  personarum.  This  would  correspond  to  the  Greek  iv6- 
Trap^LS  rather  than  to  7r€pixwpr)(T<y. 

■*  Ad  intra,  rpSiros  virap^ioo^. 

^  Ad  extra,  rpoiros  airoKa\i\f/e(tis, 


§    130.      THE   NICENE   DOCTKINE   OF   THE   TRINITY.  681 

world,  but  reason  back  tlience  to  a  trinity  of  being ;  for  God 
has  revealed  himself  as  he  is,  and  there  can  be  no  contradic- 
tion between  his  nature  and  his  works.  The  eternal  pre-exist- 
ence  of  the  Son  and  the  Spirit  is  the  background  of  the  histor- 
ical revelation  by  which  they  Avork  our  salvation.  The 
Scriptures  deal  mainly  with  the  trinity  of  revelation,  and  only 
hint  at  the  trinity  of  essence,  as  in  the  prologue  of  the 
Gospel  of  John  which  asserts  an  eternal  distinction  between 
God  and  the  Logos.  The  Nicene  divines,  however,  agreeably 
to  the  metaphysical  bent  of  the  Greek  mind,  move  somewhat 
too  exclusively  in  the  field  of  sjDeculation  and  in  the  dark 
regions  of  the  intrinsic  and  ante-mundane  relations  of  the 
Godhead,  and  too  little  upon  the  practical  ground  of  the 
facts  of  salvation. 

6.  The  Nicene  fathers  still  teach,  like  their  predecessors,  a 
certain  siibordinationism^  which  seems  to  conflict  with  the 
doctrine  of  consubstantiality.  But  we  must  distinguish 
between  a  subordinatianism  of  essence  (pva-ta)  and  a  subordi- 
natianism  of  hypostasis,  of  order  and  dignity."  The  former 
was  denied,  the  latter  affirmed.  The  essence  of  the  Godhead 
being  but  one,  and  being  absolutely  j^erfect,  can  admit  of  no 
degrees.  Father,  Son,  and  Spirit  all  have  the  same  divine 
essence,  yet  not  in  a  co-ordinate  way,  but  in  an  order  of  sub- 
ordination. The  Father  has  the  essence  originally  and  of 
himself,  from  no  other ;  he  is  the  primal  divine  subject,  to 
whom  alone  absoluteness  belongs,  and  he  is  therefore  called 
preeminently  God,^  or  the  principle,  the  fountain,  and  the 
root  of  Godhead.^  The  Son,  on  the  contrary,  has  his  essence 
by  communication  from  the  Father,  therefore,  in  a  secondary, 

'  'TwoTayr]  Ta^eais  Kol  a^iwixaros, 

^  'O  0€o'r,  and  avrSS^eos,  in  distinction  from  Qeus.  Waterland  (Works,  vol.  i. 
p.  315)  remarks  on  this:  "  The  title  of  6  QeSs,  being  understood  in  the  same  sense 
with  avTo^eor,  was,  as  it  ought  to  be,  generally  reserved  to  the  Father,  as  the  distin- 
guishing personal  character  of  the  first  Person  of  the  Holy  Trinity.  And  this 
amounts  to  no  more  than  the  acknowledgment  of  the  Father's  prerogative,  as 
Father.  But  as  it  might  also  signify  any  Person  who  is  truly  and  essentially  God,  it 
might  properly  be  appUed  to  the  Son  too :  and  it  is  so  apphed  sometimes,  though 
not  so  often  as  it  is  to  the  Father." 

^  'H  iT7}y^-i,  7]  alrla,  rj  ^i^a  ttjs  beorriTOi :  fons,  origo^  prineipium. 


682  THIRD   PEEIOD.   A.D.    311-690. 

derivative  way.  "  The  Father  is  greater  than  the  Son." 
The  one  is  imbegotten,  the  other  begotten;  the  Son  is  from 
the  Father,  but  the  Father  is  not  from  the  Son ;  father- 
hood is  in  the  nature  of  the  case  primary,  sonship  secondary. 
The  same  subordination  is  still  more  applicable  to  the  Holy 
Ghost.  The  ISTicene  fathers  thought  the  idea  of  the  divine 
unity  best  preserved  by  making  the  Father,  notwithstanding 
the  triad  of  persons,  the  monad  from  which  Son  and  Spirit 
S23ring,  and  to  which  they  return. 

This  subordination  is  most  plainly  expressed  by  Hilary  of 
Poictiers,  the  champion  of  the  Nicene  doctrine  in  the  West.* 
The  familiar  comparisons  of  fountain  and  stream,  sun  and  light, 
which  Athanasius,  like  Tertullian,  so  often  uses,  likewise  lead 
to  a  dependence  of  the  Son  upon  the  Fatlier.^  Even  the 
Mcseno-Constantinopolitan  Creed  favors  it,  in  calling  the  Son 
God  of  God,  Light  of  Light,  very  God  of  very  God.  For  if 
a  person  has  anything,  or  is  anything,  of  another,  he  has  not 
that,  or  is  not  that,  of  himself.  Yet  this  expression*  may  be 
more  correctly  understood,  and  is  in  fact  sometimes  used  by  the 
later  Nicene  fathers,  as  giving  the  Son  and  Spirit  only  their 
hypostases  from  the  Father,  while  the  essence  of  deity  is  com- 
mon to  all  three  persons,  and  is  co-eternal  in  all. 

Scriptural  argument  for  this  theory  of  subordination  was 
found  abundant  in  such  passages  as  these  :  "  As  the  Father  hath 
life  in  himself  (e'xet  ^w^y  Iv  eavro)),  so  hath  he  give7i  [eScoKe]  to 
the  Son  to  have  life  in  himself;  and  hath  given  him  authority 


'  De  trinit.  iii.  12:  "Et  quis  non  Patrem  potiorem  confitebitur,  ut  ingenitum  a 
genito,  ut  Patrem  a  Filio,  ut  eum  qui  miserit  ab  eo  qui  missus  sit,  ut  volentem  ab  eo 
qui  obediat  ?  Et  ipse  nobis  erit  testis :  Pater  major  me  est.  Htec  ita  ut  simt  intel- 
ligenda  sunt,  sed  cavendum  est,  ne  apud  imperitos  gloriam  Filii  honor  Patris 
infirmet."  In  the  same  way  Hilary  derives  all  the  attributes  of  the  Son  from  the 
Father.  Comp.  also  Hilary,  De  Synodis,  seu  de  fide  Orientalium,  pp,  11V8  and  1182 
(Opera,  ed.  Bened.),  and  the  third  and  eighteenth  canons  of  the  Sirmian  council  of 
357. 

"^  Comp.  the  relevant  passages  from  Athanasius,  Basil,  and  the  Gregories,  in 
Bull,  Dcfensio,  sect.  iv.  (Pars  ii.  p.  688  sqq.).  Even  John  of  Damascus,  with  whom 
the  productive  period  of  the  Greek  theology  closes,  still  teaches  the  same  subordina- 
tion, De  orthod.  fide,  i.  10:  Uavra  Sera  ex^'  ^  "^'^^  ''<'''  ''^  TryeC/xa,  e/c  rov  irarphs  ex*'> 
Kol.  aurh  rh  dual. 


§   130.      THE   NICENE   DOCTKINE   OF   THE  TRINITY.  683 

to  execute  judgment  also ;  "  '  "  All  tilings  are  delivered  unto  me 
{irdvTa  fxoi  TrapeSo^Tj)  of  my  Father ; "  '  "  JMy  Father  is  greater 
than  I."  ^  But  these  and  similar  passages  refer  to  the  histori- 
cal relation  of  the  Father  to  the  incarnate  Logos  in  his  estate 
of  humiliation,  or  to  the  elevation  of  human  nature  to  partici- 
pation in  the  glory  and  power  of  the  divine,*  not  to  the  eternal 
metaphysical  relation  of  the  Father  to  the  Son. 

In  this  point,  as  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the 
Nicene  system  yet  needed  further  development.  The  logical 
consistency  of  the  doctrine  of  the  consubstantiality  of  the  Son, 
upon  which  the  Nicene  fathers  laid  chief  stress,  must  in  time 
overcome  this  decaying  remnant  of  the  ante-Nicene  subordina- 
tionism.^ 

'  John  V.  26,  21. 

^  Matt.  xi.  2*7 ;  comp.  xxviii.  18. 

^  John  xiv.  28.  Cudworth  (1.  c.  ii.  422)  agrees  with  several  of  the  Nicene 
fathers  in  referring  this  passage  to  the  divinity  of  Christ,  for  the  reason  that  the 
superiority  of  the  eternal  God  over  mortal  man  was  no  news  at  all.  Mosheim,  in  a 
learned  note  to  Cudworth  in  loco,  protests  against  both  interpretations,  and  correctly 
so.  For  Christ  speaks  here  of  his  entire  divine-human  person,  but  in  the  state  of 
humiliation. 

*  John  xvii.  5 ;  Phil.  ii.  9-11. 

^  AU  important  scholars  since  Petavius  admit  the  subordinationism  in  the  Xicene 
doctrine  of  the  trinity;  e.g.,  Bull,  who  in  the  fourth  (not  third,  as  Gibbon  says) 
section  of  his.  famous  Defensio  fidei  Nic.  ("Worlis,  vol.  v.  Pars  ii.  pp.  685-'796)  treats 
quite  at  large  of  the  subordination  of  the  Son  to  the  Father,  and  in  behalf  of  the 
identity  of  the  Nicene  and  ante-Nicene  doctrine  proves  that  all  the  orthodox  fathers, 
before  and  after  the  council  of  Nic^,  "  uno  ore  docuerunt  naturam  perfectionesque  ^C/l^ 
divinas  Patri  Fihoque  competere  non  callateraliter  aut  coordinate,  sed  subordinate ; 
hoc  est,  FiUum  eandem  quidem  naturam  divinam  cum  Patre  communem  habere,  sed 
a  Patre  communicatam ;  ita  scilicet  ut  Pater  solus  naturam  illam  divinam  a  se 
habeat,  sive  a  nuUo  alio,  FiUus  autem  a  Patre ;  proiude  Pater  divinitatis,  quas  in  Filio 
est,  origo  ac  principium  sit,"  etc.  So  Waterland,  who,  in  his  vindication  of  the 
orthodox  doctrine  of  the  Trmity  against  Samuel  Clarke,  asserts  such  a  supremacy  of 
the  Father  as  is  consistent  with  the  eternal  and  necessary  existence,  the  consubstan- 
tiaUty,  and  the  infinite  perfection  of  the  Son.  Among  modern  historians  Neander, 
Gieseler,  Baur  (Lehre  von  der  Dreieinigkeit,  etc.  i.  p.  468  ff.),  and  Dornor  (Lehre 
von  der  Person  Christi,  i.  p.  929  ff.)  arrive  at  the  same  result.  But  while  Baur  and 
Domer  (though  from  different  points  of  view)  recognize  in  this  a  defect  of  the  Xicene 
doctrine,  to  be  overcome  by  the  subsequent  development  of  the  church  dogma,  the 
great  Anglican  divines,  Cudworth  (Intellectual  System,  vol.  ii.  p.  421  ff.),  Pearson, 
Bull,  Waterland  (and  among  American  divines  Dr.  Shedd)  regard  the  Nicene  sub- 
ordinationism as  the  true,  Scriptural,  and  final  form  of  the  trinitariau  doctrine,  and 


I. 


684  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

§  131.     The  Post-Nicene   Trinitarian  Doctrine  of 
Augustine. 

ATTGTJSxrNT; :  De  trinitate,  libri  xv.,  begun  in  400,  and  finished ^about  415; 
and  his  anti-Arian  works :  Contra  sermonem  Arianorum ;  Collatio  cum 
Maximino  Arianorum  episcopo ;  Contra  Maximuium  hgereticum,  libri 
ii.  (all  in  his  Opera  omnia,  ed,  Bened.  of  Venice,  1733,  in  torn.  viii.  pp. 
626-1004;  and  in  Migne's  ed.  Par.  1845,  tom.  viii.  pp.  683-1098). 


/= 


"WTiile  tlie  Greek  cliurch  stopped  with  tlie  Nicene  state- 
ment of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  the  Latin  church  carried 
the  development  onward  under  the  guidance  of  the  profound 
and  devout  sj)eculative  spirit  of  Augustine  in  the  beginning  of 
the  fifth  century,  to  the  formation  of  the  Athanasian  Creed. 
Of  all  the  fathers,  next  to  Athanasius,  Augustine-  performed 
the  greatest  service  for  this  dogma,  and  by  his  discriminating 
speculation  he  exerted  more  influence  upon  the  scholastic 
theology  and  that  of  the  Reformation,  than  all  the  Nicene 
divines.  The  points  in  which  he  advanced  upon  the  Mcene 
Creed,  are  the  following : ' 

1.  He  eliminated  the  remnant  of  subordinationism,  and 
brought  out  more  clearly  and  shai^^ly  the  consubstantiality  of 
the  three  persons  and  the  numerical  unity  of  their  essence.* 

make  no  account  of  Augustine,  who  went  beyond  it.  Kahnis  (Der  Kirchenglaube, 
ii.  p.  66  ff.)  thinks  that  the  Scriptures  go  still  further  than  the  Nicene  fathers 
in  subordinating  the  Son  and  the  Spirit  to  the  Father.  ) 

'  The  Augustinian  deetriae  of  tb*»trinity  is  diiicussed  at  leitgth-by  Ba«f,-Bte 

christl.  Ldrre  von  der  Dreieinigkeit.  etc.  vol.  i.  pp.  826-888.     Augustine  bad  but  m 

'.•.•-<■'•  Va.^„    imperfect  knowledge  of  the  Greek  lja»gB«*ge,  «b4  was  dtcrofefR  not  a«©»«rte}y 

"^Ur^'twi**  Aw6i« .  ao<yiaiiitod  with  the  writings  of  the  Nicene  fathers,  but  was  thrown  the  more  upon 

u  his  own  thinking.     Comp.  Ms  confession,  De  trinit.  I.  iii.  cap.  1  (tom.  viii.  f.  793,  ed. 

Bened.  Tenet.,  from  which  in  this  section  I  always  quote,  though  giving  the  varying 

chapter-division  of  other  editions). 

*  De  trinit.  1.  vii.  cap.  6  (§11),  tom.  viii.  f.  863:  "Non  major  essentia  est 
Pater  et  Filius  et  Spiritus  Sanctus  simul,  quam  solus  Pater,  aut  solus  Filius ;  sed  tres 
simul  illjB  substantia  [here  equivalent  to  \i-KoaTa.(mi\  sive  personte,  si  ita  dicendas 
sunt,  sequales  sunt  singulis:  quod  animalis  homo  non  percipit."  Ibid.  (f.  863): 
"  Ita  dicat  unam  essentiam,  ut  non  existimet  aliud  alio  vel  majus,  vel  melius,  vcl 
aliqua  ex  parte  divisum."  Ibid.  lib.  viii.  c.  1  (fol.  865):  "  Quod  vero  ad  se  dicuntur 
singuli,  non  dici  pluraliter  tres,  sed  unam  ipsam  trinitatem :  sicut  Deus  Pater,  Deus 
Filius,  Deus  Spiritus  Sanctus ;  et  bonus  Pater,  bonus  Filius,  bonus  Spkitus  Sanctus ; 


^'t'/fe'^tt+^r/U  (^^Mf^u*f^  jyt^r/u*'^^  a^,rd/(P^ 


§   131.      THE   POST-NICENE  TRINITAKIAN   DOCTRLNE.  685 

Yet  lie  too  admitted  that  the  Father  stood  above  the  Son  and 
the  Spirit  in  this :  that  he  alone  is  of  no  other,  bnt  is  absolute- 
ly original  and  independent ;  while  the  Son  is  begotten  of  him, 
and  the  Spirit  proceeds  from  him,  and  proceeds  from  him  in  a 
higher  sense  than  from  the  Son.'  "We  may  speak  of  three 
men  who  have  the  same  nature ;  but  the  persons  in  the  Trinity 
are  not  three  separately  subsisting  individuals.  The  divine 
substance  is  not  an  abstract  generic  nature  common  to  all,  but 
a  concrete,  living  reality.  One  and  the  same  God  is  Father, 
Sou,  and  Spirit.  All  the  works  of  the  Trinity  are  joint 
works.  Therefore  one  can  speak  as  well  of  an  incarnation  of 
God,  as  of  an  incarnation  of  the  Son,  and  the  theophanies  of 
the  Old  Testament,  which  are  usually  ascribed  to  the  Logos, 
may  also  be  ascribed  to  the  Father  and  the  Holy  Ghost. 

If  the  orthodox  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  lies  midway  be- 
tween Sabellianism  and  tritheism,  Augustine  bears  rather  to 
the  Sabellian  side.  He  shows  this  fm-ther  in  the  analogies 
from  the  human  spirit,  in  which  he  sees  the  mystery  of  the 
Trinity  reflected,  and  by  which  he  illustrates  it  with  special 
delight  and  with  fine  psychological  discernment,  though  with 
the  humble  impression  that  the  analogies  do  not  lift  the  veil, 
but  only  make  it  here  and  there  a  little  more  penetrable.  He 
distinguishes  in  man  being,  which  answers  to  the  Father, 
knowledge  or  consciousness,  which  answers  to  the  Son,  and 
will,  which  answers  to  the  Holy  Ghost.'^  A  similar  trinity  he 
finds  in  the  relation  of  mind,  word,  and  love ;  again  in  the 

et  omnipotens  Pater,  omnipotens  Filius,  omnipotens  Spiritus  Sanctus;  nee  tamen 
tres  Dii,  aut  tres  boni,  aut  tres  omnipotentes,  sed  unus  Deus,  bonus,  omnipotens  ipsa 
Trinitas."  Lib.  xv.  17  (fol.  988):  "Pater  Deus,  et  Filius  Deus,  et  Spiritus  S.  Deus, 
et  simul  unus  Deus."  De  civit.  Dei,  xi.  cap.  24 :  "  Non  tres  Dii  vel  tres  omnipoten- 
tes, sed  unus  Deus  omnipotens."    So  the  Athanasian  Creed,  vers.  11. 

'  De  trinit.  1.  xv.  c.  26  (§47,  fol.  1000):  '■'■  Pater  solus  non  est  de  alio,  ideo 
solus  appellatur  ingenitus,  non  quidem  in  Scripturis,  sed  in  consuetudine  disputan- 
tium  .  .  .  Filius  autem  de  Patre  natus  est :  et  Spiritus  Sanctus  de  Patre  princijjali-  ^  f^ 

ter,  et  ipso  sine  uUo  temporis  intervaUo  dante,  communiter  de  utroque  procedit."  i0»*^9 

*  Confess,  xiii.  11:  "Dice  haec  tria:  esse,  nosse,  velle.  Sum  enim,  et  novi,  et 
volo ;  sum  sciens,  et  volens ;  et  scio  esse  me,  et  velle ;  et  volo  esse,  et  scire.  In  his 
igitur  tribus  quam  sit  inseparabilis  vita,  et  una  vita,  et  una  mens,  et  una  essentia, 
quam  denique  inseparabilis  distinctio,  et  tamen  distinctio,  videat  qui  potest."  This 
comparison  he  repeats  in  a  somewhat  different  form,  De  civit.  Dei,  xi.  26. 


686  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-690. 

relation  of  memory,  intelligence,  and  will  or  love,  whicli  diflPer, 
and  yet  are  only  one  human  nature  (but  of  course  also  only 
one  human  person).*  "f^ 

2.  Augustine  taught  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
from  the  Son  as  well  as  from  the  Father,  though  from  the 
Father  mainly.  This  followed  from  the  perfect  essential  unity 
of  the  hypostases,  and  was  supported  by  some  passages  of 
Scripture  which  speak  of  the  Son  sending  the  Spirit.''  He 
also  represented  the  Holy  Ghost  as  the  love  and  fellowshijD  be- 
tween Father  and  Son,  as  the  bond  which  unites  the  two,  and 
which  unites  believers  with  God.^ 

The  Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan  Creed  affirms  only  the  pro- 
cessio  Spiritus  a  Patre,  though  not  with  an  exclusive  intent, 
but  rather  to  oppose  the  Pneumatomachi,  by  giving  the  Spirit 

'  Mens,  verbum,  amor ; — fnemoria,  intelligentia,  voluntas  or  caritas ;  for  volun- 
tas and  caritas  are  with  liim  essentially  the  same :  "  Quid  enim  est  aliud  caritas 
quam  voluntas?"   Again:    amans,  amatus,  mutuua  amor./On  these,  and  similar 
.    analogies  which  we  have  already  mentioned  in  §  130,  comp.  Augustine,  De  civit.  Dei, 
I ^^^^^^^^^*U*    1.  xi.  c.  24 ;  De  trinit.  xiv.  and  xv.,/and  the  criticism  of  Baur,  1.  c.  i.  p.  844  sqq. 

/[ (^,    u  -ZOf^       '  John  XV.  26:  'O  irapaKXTiros,  hv  iyu  ■Ke/xipu  vfuv  irapa.  rod  irarpos,  and  xvi. 
7  /f^  /  VtAtn        ^''  neV'l"^  aurbv  irp^i'i  vii.d.%\  compared  with  John  xiv.  26:  T^  Trrey/xa  rb  ar/iov^% 
A.  aat  ^        ni/xypet  6  Trariip  iv  r$  ovonari  ixov.     Augustine  appeals  also  to  John  xx.  22, 
where  Christ  breathes  the  Holy  Ghost  on  his  disciples,  De  trinit.  iv.  c.  20  (§  29), 
fol.  829:  "Nee  possumus  dicere  quod  Spiritus  S.  et  a  Filio  non  procedat,  neque 
enim  frustra  idem  Spiritus  et  Patris  et  Filii  Spiritus  dicitur.     Nee  video  quid  aliud 
significare  voluerit,  cum  sufSans  in  facicm  discipulorum  ait :  '  Accipite  Spiritum  S.' " 
Tract.  99  in  Evang.  Joh.  §  9 :  "  Spiritus  S.  non  de  Patre  procedit  in  Filium,  et  de 
Fiho  procedit  ad  sanctificandam  creaturam,  sed  simul  de  utroque  procedit."    But 
after  all,  he  makes  the  Spirit  proceed  mainly  from  the  Father :  de  patre  principa- 
liter.    De  trinit.  xv.  c.  26  (§  47)^    Augustine  moreover  regards  the  procession  of 
,  the  Spirit  from  the  Son  as  the  gift  of  the  Father  which  is  implied  in  the  communica- 
^^ie^i'tion  of  Hfe  to  the  Son.     Comp.  Tract.  99  in  Evang.  Joh.  §  8  :  "A  quo  habet  Filius 
^  ut  sit  Deus  (est  enim  de  Deo  Deus),  ab  illo  habet  utique  ut  etiam  de  illo  procedat 
Spiritus  Sanctus :  ac  per  hoc  Spiritus  Sanctus  ut  etiam  de  Filio  procedat,  sicut  pro- 
cedit de  Patre,  ab  ipso  habet  Patre." 

'  De  trinit.  xv.  c.  17  (§  27)  fol.  987:  "Spiritus  S.  secundum  Scripturas  sacras 
nee  Patris  solius  est,  nee  Filii  solius,  sed  amborum,  et  ideo  communem,  qua  in-vicem 
ee  diligunt  Pater  et  Filius,  nobis  insinuat  caritatem."  Undoubtedly  Ood  is  love ; 
but  this  may  be  said  in  a  special  sense  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  De  trinit.  xv.  c.  17 
(§  29),  fol.  988 :  "Ut  scilicet  in  ilia  simplici  summaque  natura  non  sit  aliud  substan- 
tia et  aliud  caritas,  sed  substantia  ipsa  sit  caritas,  et  caritas  ipsa  sit  substantia,  sive 
in  Patre,  sive  in  Filio,  sive  in  Spiritu  S.,  et  tamen  proprie  Spiritus  S.  caritas  nun- 
cupctur." 


^/ 


/=^^ 


§   131.      THE   POST-NIOENE  TEINITAEIAN   DOCTRINE.  687 

a  relation  to  tlie  Father  as  immediate  as  that  of  the  Son.  The 
Spirit  is  not  created  by  the  Son,  but  eternally  proceeds  directly 
from  the  Father,  as  the  Son  is  from  eternity  begotten  of  the 
Father.  Everything  proceeds  from  the  Father,  is  mediated 
by  the  Son,  and  completed  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  Athanasius, 
Basil,  and  the  Gregories  give  this  view,  without  denying  pro- 
cession from  the  Son.  Some  Greek  fathers,  Epiphanius,'  Mar- 
cellus  of  Ancyra,'^  and  Cyril  of  Alexandria,'  derived  the  Spirit 
fi'om  the  Father  and  the  Son ;  while  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia 
and  Theodoret  would  admit  no  dependence  of  the  Spmt  on 
the  Son. 

Augustine's  view  gradually  met  universal  acceptance  in 
the  West.  It  was  adopted  by  Boethius,  Leo  the  Great  and 
others.*  It  was  even  inserted  in  the  Nicene  Creed  by  the 
council  of  Toledo  in  589  by  the  addition  oi  Jilioque,  together 
with  an  anathema  against  its  opponents,  by  whom  are  meant,' 
however,  not  the  Greeks,  but  the  Arians. 

Here  to  this  day  lies  the  main  difference  in  doctrine  be- 
tween the  Greek  and  Latin  churches,  though  the  controversy 
over  it  did  not  break  out  till  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century 
under  patriarch  Photius  (867).^  Dr.  Waterland  briefly  sums  up 
the  points  of  dispute  thus :  *  "  The  Greeks  and  Latins  have  had 

*  Ancor.  §  9 :  ''Apa.  ©eis  e'/c  trarphs  koI  vlov  rh  r-veD/xa.  Yet  he  says  not  express- 
ly:  iKTropeverai  e/c  rou  vlov. 

^  Though  m  a  Sabellian  sense. 

*  "Who  in  his  anathemas  against  Nestorius  condemns  also  those  who  do  not  de- 
rive the  Holy  Ghost  from  Christ.  Theodoret  replied :  If  it  be  meant  that  the  Spirit 
is  of  the  same  essence  with  Christ,  and  proceeds  from  the  Father,  we  agree ;  but  if 
it  be  intended  that  the  Spirit  has  his  existence  through  the  Son,  this  is  impious. 
Comp.  Neander,  Dogmengesch.  i.  p.  322.  /~ 

*  Comp.  the  passages  in  Hagenbach's  Dogmengeschichte,  vol.  i.  p.  26*7  (in  the 
Engl.  ed.  by  H.  B.  Smith,  New  York,  1861),  and  m  Perthel,  Leo  der  G.  p.  138  ff. 
Leo  says,  e.  g.,  Serm.  Ixxv.  2  :  "  Huius  enim  beatse  trinitatis  incommutabilis  deltas 
una  est  in  substantia,  indivisa  in  opere,  concors  in  voluntate,  par  in  potentia,  asqua- 
Us  in  gloria." 

^  Comp.  on  this  controversy  J.  G.  Walch  :  Historia  controversice  Grascorum 
Latinorumque  de  Processione  Spir.  S.,  Jen.  1751.  iMso  John  Masox  Xeale:  A 
History  of  the  Holy  Eastern  Church,  Lond.  1850,  vol.  i.  1093^  A.  P.  Stanley  (East- 
ern Church,  p.  142)  calls  this  dispute  which  once  raged  sojlong  and  so  violently, 
"an  excellent  specimen  of  the  race  of  extinct  controversies."/ 
Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  237  f. 


Jltti 


It,  ^* 


C\% 


^ 


688  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

many  and  tedious  disputes  about  \hQ procession.  One  thing  is 
observable,  that  though  the  ancients,  appealed  to  by  both 
parties,  have  often  said  that  the  Holy  Ghost  proceeds yrc»??i  the 
Father,  Tdthout  mentioning  the  Son,  yet  they  never  said  that 
he  proceeded  from  the  Father  alone;  so  that  the  modern 
Greeks  have  certainly  innovated  in  that  article  in  expression 
at  least,  if  not  in  real  sense  and  meaning.  As  to  the  Latins, 
they  have  this  to  plead,  that  none  of  the  ancients  ever  con- 
demned then*  doctrine;  that  Qnany  of  them  have  expressly 
asserted  it ;  that  the  oriental  churches  themselves  rather  con- 
demn their  taking  upon  them  to  add  anything  to  a  creed 
formed  in  a  general  council,  than  the  doctrine  itself ;  that  those 
Greek  churches  that  charge  their  doctrine  as  heresy,  yet  are 
forced  to  admit  much  the  same  thing,  only  in  different  words ; 
and  that  Scripture  itself  is  plain,  that  the  Holy  Ghost  pro- 
ceeds at  least  hy  the  Son,  if  not  from  him  /  which  yet  amounts 
to  the  same  thing." 

This  doctrinal  difference  between  the  Greek  and  the  Latin 
Church,  however  insignificant  it  may  appear  at  first  sight,  is 
characteristic  of  both,  and  illustrates  the  contrast  between  the 
conservative  and  stationary  theology  of  the  East,  after  the 
great  ecumenical  councils,  and  the  progressive  and  systematiz- 
ing theology  of  the  "West.  The  wisdom  of  changing  an  an- 
cient and  generally  received  formula  of  faith  may  indeed  be 
questioned,  although  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  Nicene 
Creed  has  undergone  several  other  changes  which  were  embod- 
ied in  the  Constantinopolitan  Creed,  and  adopted  by  the  Greeks 
as  well  as  the  Latins.  But  in  the  mfttter -of-di^pute-itgelf'tfau 
Irf^Ht-d^ctrmB-is-right.  The  single  procession  of  the  Spirit 
was  closely  connected  with  the  ante-Nicene^and  Nicene  sub- 
ordinationism,'~'which  liad  to  yield  to  a  more  consislent  develop- 
ment of  homoousianism^..  The  dmtble  procession  folio ws4ftevi- 
•tably  from  the  consubstantiality  of  the  Father  and  the  Son, 
and  from  the  identity  of  the  Spirit  of  God  and  the  Spirit  of 
Christ.  It  also  fonns  a  connecting  link  between  the  Trinity 
and  Christology,'  and  between  Christology  and  Anthropology, 
by  bringing  the  Holy  Spirit  and  His  work  into  more  imme- 
diate  connection  witli  Christ,  and,  through   Him,  with   the 


^^  .«)^  •/T'   eirl-  ^  ^,«.,Mr«^-«« 


^  .^  -  ^'^^ 


lo 


§  132.      THE  ATHANASIAN  CREED.  689 

cliiirch  and  the  believer.    It  was  therefore  not  accidental  that 
the  same  Augustine,  who  first  taught  clearly  the  double  pro- 
cession, developed  also  those  profound  views  of  sin  and  grace, 
which  took  permanent  root  in  the  West,  but  had  no  influence        ^ 
in  the  East.-^  ' 


§  132.     The  Athanasian  Creed. 

G.  JoH.  Vo83  (Keform.) :  De  tribus  symbolis,  diss.  ii.  1642,  and  in  his 
Opera  Omnia,  Amstel.  1701  (forming  an  epocli  in  critical  investiga- 
tion). Archbisliop  Usiier  :  De  symbolis.  1647.  J.  H.  Heidegger 
(Eef.):  De  symbolo  Atbanasiano.  Ztir.  1680.  Em.  Tentzel  (Lxitb.) : 
Judicia  eruditorum  de  Symb.  Athan.  studiose  collecta.  Goth.  1687. 
MoNTFAUooN  (R.  0.) :  Diatribe  in  Symbolum  Quicunque,  in  the  Bene- 
dictine ed.  of  the  Opera  Athanasii,  Par.  1698,  tom.  ii.  pp.  719-735. 
Dan.  "Waterland  (Anglican) :  A  Critical  History  of  the  Athanasian 
Creed.     Cambridge,  1724,  sec.  ed.  1728  (in  "Waterland's  Works,  ed. 

Mildert,  vol.  iii.  pp.  97-270,  Qgf.  10 10,).    Dom.  M.  Speroni  IR^J^-l^ .^OA^  'Ufu>i^_ 

De  symbolo  vulgo  S.  Athanasii.     Diss.  i.  and  ii.     Patav.  1750-'51.  fy.  ^^'«v^- 

E.  KoLLNEE  ^Htfc):    Symbolik  aUer  christl.  Confessionen.     Hamb.  ^  li^v^ 

Vol.  i.  1837,  pp.  53-92.     W.  W.  Harvey  (Angl.-^ :    The  History  and  ^^'/'f) 

Theology  of  the  Three  Creeds.    Lond.  1854,  vol.  ii.  pp.  541-695.    Ph.  /Q  %/ 

SonAFF:    The  Athanasian  Creed,  in  the  Am.  Theolog.  Review,  New      §u  0 l/i>K'''''' 
York,  1866,  pp.  584^625. /t  (Comp.  the  earlier  lifccraturo,  ■iav<?brono-       ^ 
logical  order,  in  Waterland,  1.  &.-pr  108  ff.,  and-ia-Ke^Uaeix) 

The  post-Nicene   or  Augustinian   doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
reached  its  classic  statement  in  the  third  and  last  of  the  ecu- 

*  Thi^point  is  well  brought  out  in  the  following  remarks  of  my  esteemed  friend, 
the  Rev.  Dr.  E.  D.  Yeomans,  which  he  kindly  submitted  to  me  in  the  course  of 
translation  :\  The  fiUoque  is  vitally  connected  with  the  advance  of  the  Western 
church  towardka  strong  anthropology  (in  connection  with  the  doctrines  of  sin  and 
grace),  while  the\Eastem  stopped  in  a  weak  Pelagian  and  synergistic  view,  crude 
and  undeveloped.  'The  procession  only  de  Patre  per  Filium  would  put  the  church 
at  arm's  length,  so  to'speak,  from  God ;  that  is,  beyond  Christ,  off  at  an  extreme,  or 
at  one  side,  of  the  kingdsjn  of  divine  hfe,  rather  than  in  the  centre  and  bosom  of 
that  kingdom,  where  all  ttubgs  are  hers.  HlxefiUoque  puts  the  church,  which  is  the 
temple  and  organ  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  work  of  redemption,  rather  between  the 
Father  and  the  Son,  partaking  of  their  own  fellowship,  according  to  the  great  inter- 
cessory prayer  of  Christ  Himself.  It  places  the  church  in  the  meeting-point,  or  the 
Uving  circuit  of  the  interplay,  of  grace  and  nature,  of  the  divine  and  the  human ; 
thus  giving  scope  for  a  strong  doctrine  of  both  nature  and  grace,  and  to  a  strong 
doctrine  also  of  the  church  itself."  \ 

VOL.  n. — 44 


690  THIED  PEKIOD.   A.D.    311-690. 

menical  confessions,  called  the  Symtolum  Athanasianum,  or, 
as  it  is  also  named  from  its  initial  words,  tlie  Syrribolum  Qui- 
cumque ;  beyond  which  the  orthodox  development  of  the 
doctrine  in  the  Roman  and  Evangelical  churches  to  this 
day  has  made  no  advance/  This  Creed  is y^nsm'passed  as  a 
masterpiece  of  logical  clearness,  rigor,  and  precision-y-ftftd  so 
far  as  it  is  possible  at  all  to  state  in  limited  dialectic  form,  and 
to  protect  against  heresy,  the  inexhaustible  depths  of  a  myste- 
ry of  faith  into  which  the  angels  desire  to  look,  this  litm'gical 
theological  confession  achieves  the  task.  We  give  it  here  in 
full,  anticipating  the  results  of  the  Christological  controver- 
sies ;  and  we  append  parallel  passages  from  Augustine  and 
other  older  writers,  which  the  unknown  author  has  used,  in 
some  cases  word  for  word,  and  has  woven  with  great  dexterity 
into  an  organic  whole.'' 

1.  Quicumque  vult  salvus  esse,  ante  1.  Whosoever  will  be  saved,  before 
omnia  opus  est,  ut  teneat  catholicam  all  things  it  is  necessary  that  he  hold  the 
fidem."  catholic  [true  Christian]  faith. 

2.  Quam  nisi  quisque  integram  in-  2.  Which  faith  except  every  one  do 
violatamque  ^  servaverit,  absque  dubio '  keep  whole  and  undefiled,  without  doubt 
in  aeternum  peribit.  he  shall  perish  everlastingly. 

3.  Fides  autem  catholica  hsec  est,  ut  3.  But    this    is    the  catholic  faith : 


'  In  striking  contrast  with  this  unquestionable  historical  eminence  of  this  Creed 
is  Baur's  slighting  treatment  of  it  in  his  work  of  three  volumes  on  the  history  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  where  he  disposes  of  it  in  a  brief  note,  vol.  ii.  p.  33,  as  a 
vain  attempt  to  vindicate  by  logical  categories  the  harsh  and  irreconcilable  antag- 
onism of  imity  and  triad. 

'  In  the  Latin  text  we  foUow  chiefly  the  careful  revision  of  Waterland,  ch.  ix. 
(Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  221  ff.),  who  also  adds  the  various  readings  of  the  best  manu- 
scripts, and  several  parallel  passages  from  the  church  fathers  previous  to  430,  as  he 
pushes  the  composition  back  before  the  third  ecumenical  council  (431).  We  have 
also  compared  the  text  of  Montfaucon  (in  his  edition  of  Athanasius)  and  of  Walch 
(Christl.  Concordienbucb,  1*750).  The  numbering  of  verses  differs  after  ver.  19. 
Waterland  puts  vers.  19  and  20  in  one,  also  vers.  25  and  26,  39  and  40,  41  and  42, 
making  only  forty  verses  in  all.  So  Montfaucon,  p.  735  ff.  Walch  makes  forty- 
four  verses. 

*  Comp.  Augustine,  Contra  Maximin.  Arian.  1.  ii.  c.  3  (Opera,  tom.  viii.  f.  729, 
ed.  Venet.) :  "  Haec  est  fides  nostra,  quoniam  hajc  est  fides  recta,  quae  etiam  catho- 
lica mmcupatur," 

*  Some  manuscripts :  "  inviolabilemque." 

'•"  "Absque  dubio"  is  wanting  in  the  Cod.  reg.  Paris.,  according  to  Waterland. 


/^^•^^S^id:'^-^^^^^^;^  ^ti7  '^^^'^  ^^^^' 


c^^   ^H-e4i/-  ^a^  i>)^<feu^iuA^  ,    <»y  /ti    ^11^^ 


^^ 


§   132.      THE  ATHANASIAN  CEEED.  691 

unum  Deum  in  trinitate  et  trinitatem  in  That  ive  worship  one  God  iu  trinity,  and 

unitate  veneremur ; '  trinity  in  unity ; 

4.  Neque  confundentes  personas;  4.  Neither  confounding  the  persons; 
neque  substantiam  separantes.*  nor  dividing  the  substance. 

5.  Alia  est  enim  persona  Patris :  alia  5.  For  there  is  one  person  of  the  Fa- 
Filii :  alia  Spiritus  Sancti.'  ther :   another  of  the  Son :   another  of 

the  Holy  Ghost. 

6.  Sed  Patris  et  Filii  et  Spiritus  Sancti  6.  But  the  Godhead  of  the  Father, 
una  est  divinitas :  sequalis  gloria,  coseter-  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is 
na  majestas.*                                                 all  one :    the  glory  equal,  the  raaj  esty 

coetemal. 
1.  Qualis  Pater,  talis  Filius,  talis  (et)  7.  Such  as  the  Father  is,  such  is  the 

Spiritus  Sanctus.*  Son,  and  such  is  the  Holy  Ghost. 

8.  Increatus  Pater :  increatus  Filius :  8.  The  Father  is  uncreated :  the  Son 
increatus  (et)  Spiritus  Sanctus.                     is   uncreated :    the  Holy  Ghost    is   un- 
created. 

9.  Immensus  Pater:  immensus  Fi-  9.  The  Father  is  immeasurable:  the 
lius :  immensus  Spiritus  Sanctus.®                Son  is  immeasurable :  the  Holy  Ghost  is 

immeasurable. 

*  Gregory  Naz.  Orat.  xxiii.  p,  422:  .  .  .  fj.ovdSa  eV  rptdSt,  koI  rpidda  eV  /j.ovddi 

•ItpO(TKVVOVHiVT\V. 

*  A  similar  sentence  occurs  in  two  places  in  the  Commonitorium  of  Yincentius 
of  Lerinum  (f  450) :  "  Ecclesia  vero  catholica  unam  divinitatem  in  trinitatis  plenitu- 
dine  et  trinitatis  sequalitatem,  in  una  atque  eadem  majestate  veneratur,  ut  neque 
singularitas  suhstantice  personarum  confundat  proprietatem,  neque  item  trinitatis 
distinctio  unitatem  separet  deitatis"  (cap.  18  and  22).  See  the  comparative  tables 
in  Montfaucon  in  Opera  Athan.  tom.  ii.  p.  T25  sq.  From  this  and  two  other  paral- 
lels Anthelmi  (Disquisitio  de  Symb.  Athan.,  Par.  1693)  has  inferred  that  Yincentius 
of  Lerinum  was  the  author  of  the  Athanasian  Creed.  But  such  arguments  point 
much  more  strongly  to  Augustine,  who  affords  many  more  parallels,  and  from  whom 
Yincentius  drew. 

'  Yincentius  Lir.  I.  c.  cap.  19:  '■'■Alia  est  persona  Patris,  alia  Filii,  alia  Spiritus 
Sancti.  Sed  Patris  et  Filii  et  Spiritus  S.  non  alia  et  alia,  sed  una  eademque  natu- 
ra."    A  similar  passage  is  quoted  by  Waterland  from  the  Symbolum  Pelagii. 

*  Augustine,  tom.  viii.  p.  744  (ed.  Yenet.) :  "  Patris  et  Filii  et  Spiritus  Sancti 
imam  virtutem,  unam  substantiam,  unam  deitatem,  unam  7najestatem,  unam  glo- 
riam.''^ 

'  Faustini  Fid.  (cited  by  Waterland) :  "  Qualis  est  Pater  secundum  substantiam, 
talem  genuit  Filium,'"  etc. 

'  So  Augustine,  except  that  he  has  magmis  for  immensus.  Comp.  below.  Im- 
mensus is  differently  translated  in  the  different  Greek  copies:  a/coToA.Tj7rTos,  dirftpos, 
and  &fj.iTpos, — a  proof  that  the  original  is  Latin.  Yenantius  Fortunatus,  in  his  Ex- 
positio  fidei  Catholicae,  asserts :  "  Non  est  mensurabilis  in  sua  natura,  quia  illocalis 
est,  incu-cumscriptus,  ubique  totus,  ubique  prssens,  ubique  potens."  The  word  is 
thus  quite  equivalent  to  omnipresent.  The  translation  "incomprehensible"  in  the 
Anglican  Book  of  Common  Prayer  is  inaccurate,  and  probably  came  from  the  Greek 
translation  aKard\T}Kros. 


692 


THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


10.  ^ternus  Pater:  seternus  Filius: 
ajtemus  (et)  Spiritus  Sanctus.' 

11.  Et  tamen  non  tres  setemi:  sed 
unus  setemus. 

12.  Sicut  non  tres  increati:  nee  tres 
immensi ;  sed  unus  increatus  et  unus  im- 
mensus. 

13.  Similiter  omnipotens  Pater:  om- 
nipotens  Filius :  omnipotens  (et)  Spiritus 
Sanctus. 

14.  Et  tamen  non  tres  omnipotentes ; 
sed  unus  omnipotens.^ 

15.  Ita  Deus  Pater:  Deus  Filius: 
Deus  (et)  Spiritus  Sanctus.^ 

16.  Et  tamen  non  tres  Dii ;  sed  unus 
est  Deus.* 

17.  Ita  Dominus  Pater :  Dominus 
Filius :  Dominus  (et)  Spiritus  Sanxjtus. 

18.  Et  tamen  non  tres  Domini;  sed 
unus  est  Dominus.* 

19.  Quia  sicut  singulatim  unamquam- 


10.  The  Father  is  eternal:  the  Son 
eternal :  the  Holy  Ghost  eternal 

11.  And  yet  there  are  not  three  eter- 
nals ;  but  one  eternal. 

12.  As  also  there  are  not  three  un- 
created: nor  three  immeasurable:  but 
one  uncreated,  and  one  immeasurable. 

13.  So  likewise  the  Father  is  al- 
mighty: the  Son  almighty:  and  the 
Holy  Ghost  almighty. 

14.  And  yet  there  are  not  three  al- 
mighties :  but  one  almighty. 

15.  So  the  Father  is  God:  the  Son  is 
God :  and  the  Holy  Ghost  is  God. 

16.  And  yet  there  are  not  three  Gods ; 
but  one  God. 

17.  So  the  Father  is  Lord:  the  Son 
Lord :  and  the  Holy  Ghost  Lord. 

18.  And  yet  not  three  Lords ;  but  one 
Lord. 

19.  For  like  as  we  are  compelled  by 


*  Augustine,  Op.  tom.  y.  p.  543 :  "  ^ternus  Pater,  coceternus  Filius,  coceternus 
Spiritus  Sanctus.''^ 

^  In  quite  parallel  terms  Augustme,  De  trinit.  lib.  v.  cap.  8  (tom.  viii.  837  sq.); 
"  Magnus  Pa^er,  magnus  Filius,  magnus  Spiritus  S.,  non  tamen  tres  magni,  sed  unus 
magnus.  .  .  .  Et  bonus  Pater,  bonus  Filius,  bonus  Spiritus  S. ;  nee  ires  boni,  sed 
unus  bonus ;  de  quo  dictum  est,  '  Nemo  bonus  nisi  unus  Deus.'  .  .  .  Itaque  omni- 
potens Pater,  omnipotens  Filius,  omnipotens  Spiritus  S.  ;  nee  tamen  tres  omnipoten- 
tes, sed  unus  omjiipotens,  '  ex  quo  omnia,  per  quem  omnia,  in  quo  omnia,  ipsi  gloria ' 
(Rom.  ix.  36)." 

*  Comp.  Augustine,  De  trinit.  lib.  viii.  in  Prooem.  to  cap.  1 :  "  Sicut  Deus  Pater, 
Deus  Filius,  Deus  Spiritus  S. ;  et  bonus  P.,  bonus  F.,  bonus  Sp.  S. ;  et  omnipotens 
P.,  omnipotens  F.,  omnipotens  Sp.  S. ;  nee  tamen  tres  Dii,  aut  tres  boni,  aut  tres 
omnipotentes;  sed  unus  Deus,  bonus,  omnipotens,  ipsa  Trinitas." — Serm.  215  (Ope- 
ra, tom.  V.  p.  948):  "Unus  Pater  Deus,  unus  Filius  Deus,  unus  Spiritus  S.  Deus: 
nee  tamen  Pater  et  F.  et  Sp.  S.  tres  Dii,  sed  unus  Deus."  De  trinit.  x.  c.  11  (§  18); 
"Hsec  igitur  tria,  memoria,  mteUigentia,  voluntas,  quoniam  non  sunt  tres  vitae,  sed 
una  vita ;  nee  tres  mentes,  sed  ima  mens ;  consequenter  utique  nee  tres  substantias 
sunt,  sed  una  substantia."  Comp.  also  Ambrosius,  De  SpLritu  S.  iii.  Ill:  "Ergo 
sanctus  Pater,  sanctus  Filius,  sanctus  et  Spiritus ;  sed  non  tres  sancti ;  quia  unus  est 
Deus  sanctus,  unus  est  Dominus ; "  and  similar  places. 

*  Comp,  the  above  passage  from  Augustine,  and  De  trinit.  i.  c.  5  (al.  8):  "Et 
tamen  hanc  trinitatem  non  tres  Decs,  sed  unum  Dcum.''^  A  similar  passage  in  Vigi- 
lius  of  Tapsus,  De  trinitate,  and  iu  a  sermon  of  Caesarius  of  Aries,  which  is  ascribed 
to  Augustine  (v.  399). 

*  Augustine :  "  Non  tamen  sunt  duo  Dii  et  duo  Domini  secundum  formam  Dei, 
sed  ambo  cum  Spiritu  suo  ^inus  est  Dominus  .  .  .  sed  simul  omnes  7ion  tres  Dominos 


132.      THE   ATHANASIAN   CEEED. 


693 


que  personam  et  Deum  et  Dominum  con- 
fiteri  Christiana  veritate  compellimur :  * 

20.  Ita  tres  Deos,  aut  (tres  ^)  Domi- 
no3  dicere  catholica  religione  prohibe- 
mur. 

21.  Pater  a  nullo  est  factus ;  nee  crea- 
tus ;  nee  genitus. 

22.  Filius  a  Patre  solo  est : '  non 
factus ;  nee  creatus ;  sed  genitus. 

23.  Spiritus  Sanctus  a  Patre  et  Filio : 
non  factus ;  nee  creatus ;  nee  genitus 
(est);  sed  procedens.'' 

24.  TJnus  ergo  Pater,  non  tres  Patres : 
unus  Filius,  non  tres  Filii :  unus  Spiritus 
Sanctus,  non  tres  Spiritus  Sancti.' 

25.  Et  in  hac  trinitate  nihil  prius,  aut 
posterius :  nihil  maius,  aut  minus.® 

26.  Sed  totse  tres  personas  coaetemse 
sibi  sunt  et  coasquales. 

27.  Ita,  ut  per  omnia,  sicut  jam  supra 
dictum  est,  et  unitas  in  trinitate  et  trini- 
tas  in  uuitate  veneranda  sit.'' 

28.  Qui  vult  ergo  salvus  esse,  ita  de 
trinitate  sentiat. 


the  Christian  verity  to  acknowledge  every 
Person  by  himself  to  be  God  and  Lord : 

20.  So  are  we  forbidden  by  the  catho- 
lic rehgion  to  say,  there  are  three  Gods, 
or  three  Lords. 

21.  The  Father  is  made  of  none;  nei- 
ther created ;  nor  begotten. 

22.  The  Son  is  of  the  Father  alone ; 
not  made ;  nor  created ;  but  begotten. 

23.  The  Holy  Ghost  is  of  the  Father 
and  the  Son :  not  made ;  neither  created ; 
nor  begotten ;  but  proceeding. 

24.  Thus  there  is  one  Father,  not 
three  Fathers :  one  Son,  not  three  Sons : 
one  Holy  Ghost,  not  three  Holy  Ghosts. 

25.  And  in  this  Trinity  none  is  before 
or  after  another :  none  is  greater  or  less 
than  another. 

26.  But  the  whole  three  Persons  are 
co-eternal  together,  and  co-equal. 

27.  So  that  in  all  things,  as  aforesaid, 
the  Unity  in  Trinity,  and  the  Trinity  in 
Unity  is  to  be  worshipped. 

28.  He  therefore  that  will  be  saved, 
must  thus  think  of  the  Trinity. 


esse  Deos,  sed  unum  Dominum  Deum  dico."     Contra  Maximin.  Arian.  1.  ii.  c.  2  and 
3  (Opera,  viii.  f.  729). 

'  Others  read :  "  Deum  ac  Dominum." 

*  Waterland  omits  tres,  Walch  has  it. 

'  Solo  is  intended  to  distinguish  the  Son  from  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  is  of  the 
Fa.ther  and  of  the  Son;  thus  containing  already  the  Latin  doctrine  of  the  double 
procession.  Hence  some  Greek  copies  strike  out  alo7ie,  while  others  inconsistently 
retain  it. 

*  This  is  manifestly  the  Latin  doctrine  of  the  processio,  which  would  be  still 
more  plainly  expressed  if  it  were  said :  "  sed  ab  utroque  procedens."  Comp.  Augus- 
tine, De  trinit.  hb.  xv.  cap.  26  (§47):  "Non  igitur  ab  utroque  est  genitus,  sed  pro- 
cedit  ab  utroque  amborum  Spiritus."  Most  Greek  copies  (comp.  in  Montfaucon  in 
Athan.  Opera,  torn.  ii.  p.  728  sqq.)  omit  et  Filio,  and  read  only  airh  rod  ■KaTp6s. 

*  Augustine,  Contra  Maxim,  ii.  3  (torn.  viii.  f.  729) :  "  In  Trinitate  quas  Deus 
est,  unus  est  Pater,  non  duo  vel  tres;  et  unus  Filius,  non  duo  vel  tres ;  et  unus 
amborimi  Spiritus,  non  duo  vel  ires." 

*  August.  Serm.  215,  tom.  v.  f.  948 :  "In  hac  trinitate  non  est  aliud  alio  majus 
aut  minus,  nulla  operum  separatio,  nulla  dissimiUtu^o  substantise."  Waterland 
quotes  also  a  kindred  passage  from  the  Symb.  Pelagii. 

'  So  Waterland  and  the  AngUcan  Liturgy.  The  Lutheran  Book  of  Concord 
reverses  the  order,  and  reads :  trinitas  in  unitate,  et  xmitas  in  trinitate. 


69.4 


THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


29.  Sed  necessarium  est  ad  asternam 
salutem,  ut  incamationem  quoque  Domini 
nostri  Jesu  Christi  fideliter  *  credat. 

30.  Est  ergo  fides  recta  ut  credamus 
et  confiteamur  quod'  Dominus  noster 
Jesus  Christus,  Dei  Filius,  Deus  pariter 
et  Homo  est. 

31.  Deus  ex  substantia  Patris,  ante 
secula  genitus,  et  Homo  ex  substantia 
matris,  in  seculo  natus. 

32.  Perfectus  Deus :  perfectus  Homo, 
ex  anima  rational!  et  humana  came  sub- 
sistens. 

33.  w^qualis  Patri  secundum  divinita- 
tem:  minor  Patre  secundum  humanita- 
tem.* 

34.  Qui  licet  Deus  sit  et  Homo ;  non 
duo  tamen ;  sed  unus  est  Christus.^ 

35.  Unus  autem,  non  conversione  di- 
vinitatis  in  carnem,  sed  assumtione  huma- 
nitatis  in  Deum.' 

36.  Unus  omnino,  non  confusione 
substantise,  sed  unitate  personse.® 

37.  Xam  sicut  auima  rationalis  et 
caro  imus  est  homo ;  ita  Deus  et  Homo 
unus  est  Christus.^ 

38.  Qui  passus  est  pro  salute  nostra : 
descendit  ad  inferos :  ^  tertia  die  resur- 
rexit  a  mortuis. 


29.  Furthermore,  it  is  necessary  to 
everlasting  salvation,  that  we  believe  also 
rightly  in  the  incarnation  of  oiu'  Lord 
Jesus  Christ. 

30.  Now  the  right  faith  is,  that  we 
believe  and  confess,  that  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  is  God  and 
Man. 

31.  God,  of  the  substance  of  the  Fa- 
ther, begotten  before  the  worlds:  and 
Man,  of  the  substance  of  His  mother, 
born  in  the  world. 

32.  Perfect  God :  perfect  Man,  of  a 
reasonable  soul  and  human  flesh  subsist- 
ing. 

33.  Equal  to  the  Father  as  touching 
His  Godhead :  inferior  to  the  Father  as 
touching  His  Manhood. 

34.  And  although  He  be  God  and 
Man ;  yet  He  is  not  two,  but  one  Christ. 

35.  One,  not  by  conversion  of  the 
Godhead  into  flesh;  but  by  assumption 
of  the  Manhood  into  God. 

36.  One  altogether,  not  by  confusion 
of  substance ;  but  by  unity  of  person. 

37.  For  as  the  reasonable  soul  and 
flesh  is  one  man ;  so  God  and  Man  is  one 
Christ. 

38.  Who  suffered  for  our  salvation: 
descended  into  hades :  rose  again  the  third 
day  from  the  dead. 


'  In  the  Greek  copies  variously  rendered :  op^ws,  or  mcrrus,  or  /3«j8ai'aiy. 
'  Waterland  reads  quia. 

'  Augiist.  Epist.  137  (cited  by  Waterland):  '■'•  ^qualem  Patri  secundum  Divini- 
(atein,  minorem  autem  Patre  secundum  carnem,  hoc  est,  secundum  hominem." 

*  Similarly  Augustine,  Tract,  in  Job.  p.  699 :  "■Non  duo,  sed  unus  est  Christus ;'''' 
and  Vincentius  Lirin.  1.  c. :  "  Ummi  Christum  Jesum,  non  duos  .  .  .  unus  est 
Christus." 

^  Vincentius,  1.  c.  cap.  19 :  "  Unus  autem,  non  .  .  .  divinitatis  et  humanitatis 
confusione,  sed  unitate  personce  .  .  .   non  conversione  naturae,  sed  personcs." 

^  August,  torn.  v.  f.  885  :  "  Idem  Deus  qui  homo,  et  qui  Deus  idem  homo :  non 
confusione  naturae,  sed  unitate  persona;.'''' 

">  Aug.  Tract,  in  Joh.  p.  699  (cited  by  Waterland) :  "  Sicut  enim  umis  est  homo 
anima  rationalis  et  caro  ;  sic  umi,s  est  Christus  Deus  et  homo." 

*  Some  manuscripts:  ad  infernos,  or  ad  inferna.  The  Apostles'  Creed  of  Aqui- 
leia  in  Rufinus  reads :  descendit  ad  infera. 


§   132.      THE   ATHANASIAJSr   CREED.  695 

39.  Adscendit  ad  coelos :  sedet  ad  39.  He  ascended  into  heaven :  He  sit- 
dexteram  (Dei)  Patris  omnipotentia :            teth  on  the  right  hand  of  God,  the  Father 

almighty : 

40.  Inde  venturua  (est),  judicare  vivos  40.  From  whence  He  shall  come  to 
et  mortuos.                                                   judge  the  quick  and  the  dead. 

41.  Ad  cuius  adventum  omnes  homi-  41.  At  whose  coming  all  men  must 
ne3    resurgere    habent  cum   corporibus    rise  again  with  their  bodies ; 

Euis; 

42.  Et  reddituri  sunt  de  factis  pro-  42.  And  shall  give  account  for  their 
priis  rationem.  own  works. 

43.  Et  qui  bona  egerunt,  ibunt  in  43.  And  they  that  have  done  good 
vitam  aeternam ;  qui  vero  mala,  in  ignem  shall  go  into  life  everlasting  ;  but  they 
aetemum.  that  have  done  evil,  into  everlasting  fire. 

44.  Hgec  est  fides  cathoHca,  quam  44.  This  is  the  cathoHc  faith ;  which 
nisi  quisque  fideliter  firmiterque '  credi-  except  a  man  beheve  truly  and  firmly, 
derit,  salvus  esse  non  poterit.  he  cannot  be  saved. 

The  origin  of  tliis  remarkable  production  is  veiled  in  mys- 
terious darkness.  Like  the  Apostles'  Creed,  it  is  not  so  much 
the  work  of  any  one  person,  as  the  production  of  the  sj)irit  of 
the  church.  As  the  Apostles'  Creed  represents  the  faith  of  the 
ante-Nicene  period,  and  the  Nicene  Creed  the  faith  of  the 
Nicene,  so  the  Athanasian  Creed  gives  formal  expression  to 
the  post-Xicene  faith  in  the  mystery  of  the  Trinity  and  the 
incarnation  of  God.  The  old  tradition  which,  since  the  eighth 
centuiy,  has  attributed  it  to  Athanasius  as  the  great  champion 
of  the  orthodox  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  has  been  long  ago 
abandoned  on  all  hands;  for  in  the  writings  of  Athanasius 
and  his  contemporaries,  and  even  in  the  acts  of  the  third  and 
fourth  ecumenical  councils,  no  trace  of  it  is  to  be  found.*  It 
does  not  appear  at  all  in  the  Greek  church  till  the  eleventh  or 
twelfth  century  ;  and  then  it  occui's  in  a  few  manuscripts 
which  bear  the  manifest  character  of  translations,  vary  from 
one  another  in  several  points,  and  omit  or  modify  the  clause 
on  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost  from  the  Father  and  the 

'  The  Greek  copies  read  either  wkttw!  alone,  or  ttio-tcSj  re  km.  /Se^Saioir,  or  e/c 
TTKrTeoiT  Pf^alus  TncTivar;. 

'  Ger.  Vossius  first  demonstrated  the  spuriousness  of  the  tradition  in  his  deci- 
sive treatise  of  1642.  Even  Koman  divines,  like  Quesnel,  Dupm,  Pagi,  Tillemont, 
Montfaucon,  and  Muratori,  admit  the  spuriousness.  KoUner  adduces  nineteen  proofs 
against  the  Athanasian  origin  of  the  Creed,  two  or  three  of  which  are  perfectly  suffi- 
cient without  the  rest.     Comp.  the  most  important  in  my  treatise,  1.  c.  p.  592  fF. 


696  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Son  (v.  23).'  It  implies  the  entire  post-Mcene  or  Angnstinian 
development  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  and  even  the 
Christological  discussions  of  the  fifth  centurj,  though  it  does 
not  contain  the  anti-Nestorian  test-word  '^eoT6Ko<;,  inother  of 
God.  It  takes  several  passages  verbally  from  Augustine's 
work  on  the  Trinity,  which  was  not  completed  till  the  year 
415,  and  from  the  Coinmonitoriurrh  of  Yincentius  of  Lerinum, 
434 ;  works  which  evidently  do  not  quote  the  passages  from 
an  already  existing  symbol,  but  contribute  them  as  stones  to 
the  building.  On  the  other  hand  it  contains  no  allusion  to  the 
Monophysite  and  Monothelite  co.i^troversies,  and  cannot  be 
placed  later  than  the  yeaj^  ^"^^X  lor  at  that  "date  Y^nautius 
Fortunatus  of  Poi^tiers  wm£e  a  sliort  commentary  on  itTT"^ 
/{//'' f^/^  ..J^  probably  originated  about  the  middle  of  the  ^itK  centu- 
ry, in  the  school  of  Augustine,  and  in  Gaul,  where  it  makes 
yy^  its  first  appearance,  and  acquires  its  first  ecclesiastical  authori- 
4f4\f^£A  ^7-  ■^^^^  ^^®  precise  author  or  compiler  cannot  be  discovered, 
J  *^^^  and  the  various  views  of  scholars  concerning  him  are  mere 
opinions.'*  From  Gaul  the  authority  of  this  symbol  spread 
over  the  whole  of  Latin  Christendom,  and  subsequently  made 
its  way  into  some  portions  of  the  Greek  church  in  Europe.  The 
various  Protestant  churches  have  ^either  formally  adopted  the 
Athanasian  Creed  together  with  the  INicene  and  the  Apostles', 
or  at  all  events  agree,  in  their  symbolical  books,  witli  its  doc- 
trine of  the  trinity  and  the  person  of  Christ.^ 

'  Wherever  the  creed  has  come  into  use  in  the  Greek  churches,  this  verse  haa 
been  omitted  as  a  Latin  interpolation. 

°  Comp.  the  catalogue  of  opinions  in  Watcrland,  vol.  iii.  p.  117;  in  Kollner; 
and  in  my  own  treatise.  The  majority  of  voices  have  spoken  in  fiivor  of  Yigilius  of 
Tapsus  in  Africa,  A.  D.  484 ;  others  for  Yincentius  of  Lerinum,  434 ;  Waterland  for 
Hilary  of  Aries,  about  430 ;  while  others  ascribe  it  mdefinitely  to  the  North  African, 
or  Gallic,  or  Spanish  church  in  the  sixth  or  seventh  century.  Harvey  recently, 
but  quite  grouudlessly,  has  dated  the  composition  back  to  the  year  401,  and 
claims  it  for  the  bishop  Yictricius  of  Rouen  (Hist,  and  Theol.  of  the  Three  Creeds, 
vol.  ii.  p.  583  f.).  He  thinks  that  Augustine  quotes  from  it,  but  this  father  nowhere 
alludes  to  such  a  Sjrmbol ;  the  author  of  the  Creed,  on  the  contrary,  has  taken  sev- 
eral passages  from  Augustine,  De  Trinitate,  as  well  as  from  Yincentius  of  Lerinum 
and  other  sources.     Comp.  the  notes  to  the  Creed  above,  and  my  treatise,  p.  596  ff. 

^  On  this  agreement  of  the  symboUcal  books  of  the  Evangelical  churches  with 
the  Athanasianum,  comp.  my  treatise,  1.  c.  p.  610  fif.     Luther  considers  this  Creed 


^->«-.    ♦  »%;^  .         ^ 


y/    /UU-*^  ^  U-f<^^^C<^  ^ii^  ^i*'*^'^^^-^:'''^*^ 


^X^    i^'-n^-f/e^cc^n^M   /Se.   ''^ 


i£l>»^ 


ly^-'/Wt  ^^t^  <^ 


I 


§   132,      THE   ATHAN ASIAN   CREED.  697 

The  Atbanasian  Creed  presents,  in  short,  sententious  articles, 
and  in  bold  antitheses,  the  church  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  in 
opposition  to  Unitarianism  and  tritheism,  and  the  doctrine  of 
the  incarnation  and  the  divine-human  person  of  Christ  in  op- 
position to  Nestoriauism  and  Eutychianism,  and  thus  clearly 
and  concisely  sums  up  the  results  of  the  trinitariaii  and  Chris- 
tological  controversies  of  the  ancient  church.  It  teaches  the 
numerical  unity  of  substance  and  the  triad  of  persons  in  the 
Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  with  the  perfect  deity 
and  perfect  humanity  of  Christ  in  one  indivisible  person.  In 
the  former  case  we  have  one  substance  or  nature  in  three  per- 
sons ;  in  the  latter,  two  natures  in  one  divine-human  person. 

On  this  faith  eternal  salvation  is  made  to  depend.     By  the 
damnatory  clauses  in  its  prologue,  and  ..epilogue  the  Athana- 
sianum  has  given  offence  even  to  those  who  agree  with  its 
contents.     Bwt'ilie  original  Nicene  Creed  contained  likewise  y^^      ,, 
an  anathema,  whiefa  ""afterwards  dropped  out  of  it  j  the  anathe-'  i'tt-r"*^ 
ma^i&-t»-be  refeiTe4-fee-the-her«6ie37-a»d^ayHot-4»e  applied-to  >^ 

"^  '.ciiIaii.pcrsQjaSy  who&e-|«4ge  is  €k)d  alone  ^^d"^M»lly ,.^4he 

•intoiitioa  is,  not~th«>t^alvation  and  perdition  depend  on         ^4~ 
the  acceptance  and  rejection  of  any   theological  formulary  or 
human  conception  and  exhibition  of  the  truth ,"4)u^-tfiai  faith  -/^I's 

in  the  revealed  truth  itself,  in  the  living  God,  Father,  Son,  and  ^  , 

Spirit,  and  in  Jesus  Christ  the  God-Man  and  the  Saviour  of  the 
worlfl,  is  the  thing  which  saves,  even  where  the  understanding        * 
may  be  very  defective,  and  t^jit  unbelief  is  the  thing  which      ^  ' 
condemns;    according  tothe  declaration  of  the  Lord:    "He  '•^' 

that  believeth  <'and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved ;  but  he  that^c  ^^"     __ 
believeth  not  shall  be  damned. "a    Ii^  particular  actual  cases  liS.'^y 'u'/ 

Christian  humility  and  charity  of -.course  Require  the  greatest       Atvi/jrv*^ 
caution,  and  leave  the  judgment  to  the  all-knowing  and  just     ^UruX^t,^ 
God.  ' .  ^  ■ 

The  Athanasian  Creed  closes  the  succession  of  ecumenical   r^ee</  ^/a/iH*t*Jl 
symbols;    symbols  which   are    acknowledged    by  the   entire 

the  weightiest  and  grandest  production  of  the  church  since  the  time  of  the  Apostles- 
In  the  Church  of  England  it  is  still  sung  or  chanted  in  the  cathedrals.  The  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  church  in  the  United  States,  on  the  contrary,  has  excluded  it  from 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  ^^    ^^    ^  ^    *Vtrw*y    ^at^^cwce^u 


698  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

orthodox  Christian  world,'  except  that  Evangelical  Protestant- 
ism ascribes  to  them  not  an  absolute,  but  only  a  relative  author- 
ity, and  reserves  the  right  of  freely  investigating  and  further 
developing  all  church  doctrines  from  the  inexhaustible  foun- 
tain of  the  infallible  word  of  God. 

II.    The  Origenistic  Contkoveksies. 

I.  Epiphanius  :  Hffires.  64.  Several  Epistles  of  Epiphanius,  Theophilus 
of  Alex.,  and  Jerome  (in  Jerome's  Epp.  51  and  87-100,  ed.  Vallarsi). 
The  controversial  works  of  Jerome  and  Eufinxts  on  the  orthodoxy 
of  Origen  (Rufini  Prtefatio  ad  Orig.  jrepl  ap^oii/;  and  Apologia, s. 
invectivarum  in  fiieron. ;  Hieeonymi  Ep.  84  ad  Pammachium  et 
Oceanum  de  erroribus  Origenis;  Apologia  adv.  Eufinum  libri  iii, 
"written  402-403,  etc.).  Palladius:  Vita  Johannis  Chrysostomi 
(in  Chrysost.  Opera,  vol.  xiii.  ed.  Montfaucon).  Sooeates  :  H.  E.  vi. 
3-18.  SozoMENus :  H.  E.  viii.  2-20.  Theodoret  :  H.  E.  v.  27  sqq. 
Photitjs:  Biblioth.  Cod.  59.    Mansi:  Cone.  torn.  iii.  fol.  1141  sqq. 

n.  HuETirs :  Origeniana  (Opera  Orig.  vol.  iv.  ed.  De  la  Eue).  Douom : 
Histoire  des  mouvements  arrives  dans  I'eglise  an  sujet  d'Origene. 
Par.  1700.  Waloh:  Historic  der  Ketzereien.  Th.  vii.  p.  427  sqq. 
Soheoeckh:  Kirchengeschichte,  vol.  x.  108  sqq.  Comp.  the  mono- 
graphs of  Eedepenning  and  Thomasius  on  Origen;  and  Neander: 
Der  heil.  Joh.  Chrysostomus.  Berl.  1848,  3d  ed.  vol.  ii.  p.  121  sqq. 
Hefele  '(R.  C.) :  Origenistenstreit,  in  the  Kirchenlexicon  of  "Wetzer 
and  "Welte,  vol.  vii.  p.  847  sqq.,  and  Oonciliengeschichte,  vol.  ii.  p.  76 
sqq.     O.  ZooKLEE :  Hieronymus.     Gotha,  1865,  p.  238  flf ;  391  ff. 


§  133.     TTie  Origenistic  Controversy  in  Palestine.    Epipha- 
nius,  Pujmus,  and  Jerome,  a.  d.  394-399. 

Between  the  Arian  and  the  Nestorian  controversies,  and  in 
indirect  connection  with  tlie  former,  come  the  vehement  and 
petty  personal  quarrels  over  the  orthodoxy  of  Origen,  which 
brought  no  gain,  indeed,  to  the  development  of  the  church 
doctrine,  yet  which  have  a  bearing  upon  the  history  of  the- 
ology, as  showing  the  progress  of  orthodoxy  under  the  twofold 
aspect  of  earnest  zeal  for  the  pure  faith,  and  a  narrow-minded 
intolerance  towards  all  free  speculation.  The  condemnation 
of  Origen  was  a  death  blow  to  theological  science  in  the 
Greek  church,  and  left  it  to  stiflen  gradually  into  a  mechanical 
traditionalism  and  formalism.     We  shall  confine  ourselves,  if 


u 


§    133.      THE   OEIGENISTIC   CONTEOTEKSY   IN   PALESTINE,     C99 

possible,  to  the  points  of  general  interest,  and  omit  the  ex- 
tremely insipid  and  humiliating  details  of  personal  invective 
and  calumny. 

It  is  the  privilege  of  great  pioneering  minds  to  set  a  mass 
of  other  minds  in  motion,  to  awaken  passionate  sympathy  and 
antipathy,  and  to  act  with  stimulating  and  moulding  power 
even  upon  after  generations.  Their  very  errors  are  often  more 
useful  than  the  merely  traditional  orthodoxy  of  unthinking 
men,  because  they  come  from  an  honest  search  after  truth, 
and  provoke  new  investigation.  One  of  these  minds  was 
Okigen,  the  most  learned  and  able  divine  of  the  ante-Nicene 
period,  the  Plato  or  the  Schleiermacher  of  the  Greek  church. 
Dm-ing  his  life-time  his  peculiar,  and  for  the  most  part  Plato- 
nizing,  views  already  aroused  contradiction,  and  to  the  ad- 
vanced orthodoxy  of  a  later  time  they  could  not  but  appear  as 
dangerous  heresies.  Methodius  of  Tyre  (f  311)  first  attacked 
his  doctrines  of  the  creation  and  the  resurrection ;  while  Pam- 
philus  (f  309),  from  his  prison,  wrote  an  apology  for  Origen, 
which  Eusebius  afterwards  completed.  His  name  was 
drawn  into  the  Arian  controversies,  and  used  and  abused  by 
both  parties  for  their  own  ends.  The  question  of  the  ortho- 
doxy of  the  great  departed  became  in  this  way  a  vital  issue  of 
the  day,  and  rose  in  interest  with  the  growing  zeal  for  pure 
'doctrine  and  the  growing  horror  of  all  heresy. 

Upon  this  question  three  parties  arose:  free,  progressive 
disciples,  blind  adherents,  and  blind  opponents.' 

1.  The  true,  independent  followers  of  Origen  drew  from 
his  writings  much  instruction  and  quickening,  without  com- 
mitting themselves  to  his  words,  and,  advancing  with  the 
demands  of  the  time,  attained  a  clearer  knowledge  of  the  spe- 
cific doctrines  of  Christianity  than  Origen  himself,  without 
thereby  losing  esteem  for  his  memory  and  his  eminent  serv- 
ices. Such  men  were  Pamj^hilus,  Eusebius  of  C^sarea,  Didy- 
mus  of  Alexandria,  and  in  a  wider  sense  Athanasius,  Basil  the 
Great,  Gregory  of  Nazianzum,  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa ;  and 
among  the  Latin  fathers,  Hilary,  and  at  first  Jerome,  who 

*  Similar  parties  have  arisen  with  reference  to  Luther,  Schleiermaclier,  and  other 
great  theologians  and  philosophers. 


700  THIED  PEEIOD.   A.D.    311-690. 

afterwards  joined  the  opponents.  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  and 
perhaps  also  Didymus,  even  adhered  to  Origen's  doctrine  of  the 
final  salvation  of  all  created  intelligences. 

2.  The  blind  and  slavish  followers,  incapable  of  compre- 
hending the  free  spirit  of  Origen,  clave  to  the  letter,  held  all 
his  immature  and  erratic  views,  laid  greater  stress  on  them 
than  Origen  himself,  and  pressed  them  to  extremes.  Such 
mechanical  fidelity  to  a  master  is  always  apostasy  to  his  spirit, 
which  tends  towards  continual  growth  in  knowledge.  To  this 
class  belonged  the  Egyptian  monks  in  the  ISTitrian  mountains ; 
four  in  particular :  Dioscurus,  Ammonius,  Eusebius,  and  En- 
thymius,  who  are  known  by  the  name  of  the  "  tall  brethren,"  * 
and  were  very  learned. 

3.  The  opponents  of  Origen,  some  from  ignorance,  others 
from  narrowness  and  want  of  discrimination,  shunned  his 
speculations  as  a  source  of  the  most  dangerous  heresies,  and 
in  him  condemned  at  the  same  time  all  free  theological  discus- 
sion, without  which  no  progress  in  knowledge  is  possible,  and 
without  which  even  the  Nicene  dogma  would  never  have  come 
into  existence.  To  these  belonged  a  class  of  Egyptian  monks 
in  the  Seetic  desert,  with  Pachomius  at  their  head,  who,  in 
opposition  to  the  mysticism  and  s^^iritualism  of  the  Origenis- 
tic  monks  of  Nitria,  urged  grossly  sensuous  views  of  divine 
things,  so  as  to  receive  the  name  of  Anthropomorphites./TJj^ 
Roman  church,  in  which  Origen  was  scarcely  known  by 
name  before  the  Arian  disputes,  shared  in  a  general  way  the 
strong  prejudice  against  him  as  an  unsound  and  dangerous 
writer. 

The  leader  in  the  crusade  against  the  bones  of  Origen  was 
the  bishop  Epiphanius  of  Salamis  (Constantia)  in  C}^rus 
(f  403),  an  honest,  well-meaning,  and  by  his  contemporaries 
highly  respected,  but  violent,  coarse,  contracted,  and  bigoted 
monastic  saint  and  heresy  hunter.  He  had  inherited  from  the 
monks  in  the  deserts  of  Egypt  an  ardent  hatred  of  Origen  as 
an  arch-heretic,  and  for  this  hatred  he  gave  documentary  jus- 
tification from  the  numerous  writings  of  Origen  in  his  Pana- 
rion,  or  chest  of  antidotes  for  eighty  heresies,  in  which  he 

'  'ASeA^ol  fxaKpoi,  on  account  of  their  bodily  size. 


..i-    ..   i;. 


^       ^ 


§   133.      THE   OKIGENISTIC    CONTEOVERST   IN   PALESTINE.     701 

branded  him  as  the  father  of  Arianism  and  many  other  errors.' 
Not  content  with  this,  he  also  endeavored  by  journeying  and 
oral  discourse  to  destroy  everywhere  the  influence  of  the  long 
departed  teacher  of  Alexandria,  and  considered  himself  as 
doing  God  and  the  church  the  greatest  service  thereby. 

With  this  object  the  aged  bishop  journeyed  in  394  to  Pal- 
estine, where  Origen  was  still  held  in  the  highest  consideration, 
especially  with  John,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  and  with  the 
learned  monks  Rufinus  and  Jerome,  the  former  of  whom  was 
at  that  time  in  Jerusalem  and  the  latter  in  Bethlehem.  He 
delivered  a  blustering  sermon  in  Jerusalem,  excited  laughter, 
and  vehemently  demanded  the  condemnation  of  Origen.  John 
and  Ruflnus  resisted ;  but  Jerome,  who  had  previously  consid- 
ered Origen  the  greatest  church  teacher  after  the  apostles,  and 
had  learned  much  from  his  exegetical  writings,  without  adopt- 
ing his  doctrinal  errors,  yielded  to  a  solicitude  for  the  fame 
of  his  own  orthodoxy,  passed  over  to  the  opposition,  broke  off 
church  fellowship  with  John,  and  involved  himself  in  a  most 
violent  literary  contest  with  his  former  friend  Rufinus  ;  which 
belongs  to  the  chronique  scandaleuse  of  theology.  The  schism 
was  terminated  indeed  by  the  mediation  of  the  patriarch 
Theophilus  in  397,  but  the  dispute  broke  out  afresh.  Jerome 
condemned  in  Origen  particularly  his  doctrine  of  pre-existence, 
of  the  final  conversion  of  the  devils,  and  of  demons,  and  his 
spiritualistic  sublimation  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body ; 
while  Rufinus,  having  returned  to  the  West  (398),  translated 
several  works  of  Origen  into  Latin,  and  accommodated  them  to 
orthodox  taste.  Both  were  in  fact  equally  zealous  to  defend 
themselves  against  the  charge  of  Origenism,  and  to  fasten 
it  upon  each  other,  and  this  not  by  a  critical  analysis  and  calm 
investigation  of  the  teachings  of  Origen,  but  by  personal  de- 
nunciations and  miserable  invectives.'' 

Rufinus  was  cited  before  pope  Anastasius  (398-402),  who 
condemned  Origen  in  a  Roman  synod ;  but  he  sent  a  satisfactory 

*  Haer.  64.  Compare  also  his  Epistle  to  bishop  John  of  Jerusalem,  written  894 
and  translated  by  Jerome  into  Latin  (Ep.  51,  ed.  Vallarsi),  where  he  enumerates 
eight  heresies  of  Origen  relating  to  the  trinity,  the  doctrine  of  man,  of  angek,  of  the 
world,  and  the  last  things. 

*  Comp.  the  description  of  their  conduct  by  Zcickler,  Hieronymus,  p.  396  fit 


702  THIRD  fEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

defense,  and  found  an  asylum  in  Aquileia.  He  enjoyed  tlie 
esteem  of  such  men  as  Paulinus  of  Nola  and  Augustine,  and 
died  in  Sicily  (410). 

§  134r.     The  Origenistic  Controversy  in  Egyjpt  and  Constan- 
tinojple.     Theo^hilus  and  Chrysostom.     a.  d.  399-407. 

Meanwhile  a  second  act  of  this  controversy  was  opened  in 
Egypt,  in  which  the  unprincipled,  ambitious,  and  intriguing 
bishop  TnEOPHiLtrs  of  Alexandria  plays  the  leading  part. 
This  bishop  was  at  first  an  admirer  of  Origen,  and  despised 
the  anthropomorphite  monks,  but  afterwards,  through  a  perso- 
nal quarrel  with  Isidore  and  the  "four  tall  brethren,"  who 
refused  to  deliver  the  church  funds  into  his  hands,  he  became 
an  opponent  of  Origen,  attacked  his  errors  in  several  docu- 
ments (399-403),'  and  pronounced  an  anathema  on  his  memory, 
in  which  he  was  supported  by  Epiphanius,  Jerome,  and  the 
Roman  bishop  Anastasius.  At  the  same  time  he  indulged  in 
the  most  violent  measures  against  the  Origenistic  monks,  and 
banished  them  from  Egypt.  Most  of  these  monks  fled  to 
Palestine;  but  some  fifty,  among  whom  were  the  four  tall 
brethren,  went  to  Constantinople,  and  found  there  a  cordial 
welcome  with  the  bishop  John  Chrysostom  in  401. 

In  this  way  that  noble  man  became  involved  in  the  dis- 
pute. As  an  adherent  of  the  Antiochian  school,  and  as  a 
practical  theologian,  he  had  no  sympathy  with  the  philosophi- 
cal speculation  of  Origen,  but  he  knew  how  to  appreciate  his 
merits  in  the  exposition  of  the  Scriptures,  and  was  impelled 
by  Christian  love  and  justice  to  intercede  with  Theophilus  in 
behalf  of  the  persecuted  monks,  though  he  did  not  admit  them 
to  the  holy  communion  till  they  proved  their  innocence. 

Theophilus  now  set  every  instrument  in  motion  to  overthrow 
the  long  envied  Chrysostom,  and  employed  even  Epiphanius, 

'  In  his  Epistola  Synodica  ad  episcopos  Palsestinos  et  ad  Cyprios,  400,  and  in 
three  successive  Epistolse  Paschales,  from  401-403,  all  translated  by  Jerome  and 
forming  Epp.  92,  96,  98,  and  100  of  his  Epistles,  according  to  the  order  of  Vallarsi. 
They  enter  more  deeply  into  the  topics  of  the  controversy  than  Jerome's  own  writ- 
ings against  Origen.  Jerome  (Ep.  99  ad  Theophilum)  pays  him  the  compliment: 
"  Rhetoricoe  eloquentite  jungis  philosophos,  et  Demosthenem  atque  Platonem  nobia 


§    134.      THE   OEIGENISTIC   CONTKOVERSY   IN   EGYPT.         703 

then  almost  an  octogenarian,  as  a  tool  of  his  hierarchical  plans. 
This  old  man  journeyed  in  mid-winter  in  402  to  Constantino- 
ple, in  the  imagination  that  by  his  very  presence  he  would  be 
able  to  destroy  the  thousand-headed  hydra  of  heresy,  and  he 
would  neither  hold  church  fellowship  with  Chrysostom,  who 
assembled  the  whole  clergy  of  the  city  to  greet  him,  nor  pray 
for  the  dying  son  of  the  emperor,  until  all  Origenistic  here- 
tics should  be  banished  from  the  capital,  and  he  might  publish 
the  anathema  from  the  altar.  But  he  found  that  injustice  was 
done  to  the  Nitrian  monks,  and  soon  took  ship  again  to  Cyprus, 
saying  to  the  bishops  who  accompanied  him  to  the  sea  shore  : 
"  I  leave  to  you  the  city,  the  palace,  and  hypocrisy ;  but  I  go, 
for  I  must  make  great  haste."  He  died  on  the  ship  in  the 
summer  of  403. 

"What  the  honest  coarseness  of  Epiphanius  failed  to  effect, 
was  accomplished  by  the  cunning  of  Theophilus,  who  now 
himself  travelled  to  Constantinople,  and  immediately  appeared 
as  accuser  and  judge.  He  well  knew  how  to  use  the  dissatis- 
faction of  the  clergy,  of  the  empress  Eudoxia,  and  of  the 
court  with  Chrysostom  on  account  of  his  moral  severity  and 
his  bold  denunciations.*  In  Chrysostom's  own  diocese,  on  an 
estate  "  at  the  oak  " '  in  Chalcedon,  he  held  a  secret  council  of 
thirty-six  bishops  against  Chrysostom,  and  there  procured, 
upon  false  charges  of  immorality,  unchurchly  conduct,  and 
high  treason,his  deposition  and  banishment  in  403.^  Chiysostom 
was  recalled  indeed  in  three  days  in  consequence  of  an  earth- 
quake and  the  dissatisfaction  of  the  people,  but  was  again 
condemned  by  a  council  in  404,  and  banished  from  the  court, 
because,  incensed  by  the  erection  of  a  silver  statue  of  Eudoxia 

'  According  to  Socrates  (II.  E.  vi.  4)  another  special  reason  for  the  disaffection 
was,  that  Chrysostom  always  ate  alone,  and  never  accepted  an  invitation  to  a  ban- 
quet, either  on  account  of  dyspepsia  or  habitual  abstemiousness.  But  by  the  people 
he  was  greatly  esteemed  and  loved  as  a  man  and  as  a  preacher. 

*  Uphs  tV  SpCr,  Synodus  ad  Quercum.  The  estate  belonged  to  the  imperial 
prefect  Rufinus,  and  had  a  palace,  a  large  church,  and  a  monastery.  Sozomen,  viii. 
17. 

'  Among  the  twenty-nine  charges  were  these :  that  Chrysostom  called  the  saint 
Epiphanius  a  fool  and  demon ;  that  he  wrote  a  book  full  of  dbuse  of  the  clergy ; 
that  he  received  visits  from  females  without  witnesses ;  that  he  bathed  ^lone,  and 
ate  alone !    See  Hefele,  ii.  p.  78  sqq. 


704  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

close  to  the  church  of  St.  Sophia,  and  by  the  theatrical  perfor- 
mances connected  with  it,  he  had  with  unwise  and  unjust 
exaggeration  opened  a  sermon  on  Mark  vi.  17  ff.,  in  commem- 
oration of  John  the  Baptist  with  the  personal  allusion : 
"  Again  Herodias  rages,  again  she  raves,  again  she  dances,  and 
again  she  demands  the  head  of  John  [this  was  Clirysostom's 
own  name]  upon  a  charger."  '  From  his  exile  in  Cucusus  and 
Arabissus  he  corresponded  with  all  parts  of  the  Christian  world, 
took  lively  interest  in  the  missions  in  Persia  and  Scythia,  and 
appealed  to  a  general  council.  His  opponents  procured  from 
I  jf"        Arcadius  an  order  for  his  transportation  to  the  remote  desert 

I  y^  '^^.^        of    Pityu^.       On  the  way    thither    he     died     at    Comana 
I  •1/^'^'  ^  ^        in  Pontus,  a.  d.  407,  in  the  sixtieth  year  of  his  age,  praising 
*' ■  #<W^f'-^     God  for  everything,  even  for  his  unmerited  j)ersecutions.^ 

Chrysostom  was  venerated  by  the  people  as  a  saint,  and 
thirty  years  after  his  death,  by  order  of  Theodosius  II.  (438), 
his  bones  were  brought  back  in  triumph  to  Constantinople, 
and  deposited  in  the  imperial  tomb.  The  emperor  himself 
met  fhe  remains  at  Chalcedon,  fell  down  before  the  coffin,  and 
in  the  name  of  his  guilty  parents,  Arcadius  and  Eudoxia,  im- 
,  plored  the  forgiveness  of  the  holy  man.     The  age  could  not 

indeed  understand  and  appreciate  the  bold  spirit  of  Origen, 
but  was  still  accessible  to  the  narrow  piety  of  Epiphanius  and 
the  noble  virtues  of  Chrysostom. 

In  spite  of  this  prevailing  aversion  of  the  time  to  free 
speculation,  Origen  always  retained  many  readers  and  admi- 
rers, especially  among  the  monks  in  Palestine,  two  of  whom, 
Domitian  and  Theodorus  Askidas,  came  to  favor  and  influence 
at  the  court  of  Justinian  I.  But  under  this  emperor  the  dis- 
pute on  the  orthodoxy  of  Origen  was  renewed  about  the 
middle  of  the  sixth  century  in  connection  with  the  controversy 
CD  the  Three  Chapters,  and  ended  with  the  condemnation  of 

'  TlaXw  'HpoiSios  fJ-alviTai,  iraAiv  rapdao'eTat,  iraMv  opxe'Toi,  ird\iv  eVJ  ttivuiH  ttjv 
Ki(pa\'>)v  Tov  'Iwdpvov  (riru  Aa/Seir.  Comp.  Socr.  H.  E.  vi.  18.  Eudoxia  was  a  young 
and  beautiful  woman,  who  despised  her  husband,  and  indulged  her  passions.  She 
died  four  years  after  the  birth  of  her  son  Theodosius  the  Younger,  whose  true  father 
is  said  to  have  been  the  comes  John.     Comp.  Gibbon,  eh.  xxxii. 

^  Ao^a  T^  0e<j;  ndpTooy  fveKiP,  were  his  lust  words,  the  motto  of  his  life  and  work. 


§    135.      THE   ALEXANDRIAN   AND   ANTIOCHIAN   SCHOOLS.     705 

fifteen  propositions  of  Origen  at  a  council  in  54-i.^  Since 
then  no  one  has  ventured  until  recent  times  to  raise  his  voice 
for  Origen,  and  many  of  his  works  have  perished. 

With  Cyril  of  Alexandria  the  theological  productivity  of 
the  Greek  church,  and  with  Theodoret  the  exegetical,  became 
almost  extinct.  The  Greeks  thenceforth  contented  themselves 
for  the  most  part  with  revisions  and  collections  of  the  older 
treasures.  A  church  which  no  longer  advances,  goes  back- 
wards, or  falls  in  stagnation. 


III.    The  Christological  Controversies. 

Among  the  works  on  the  -whole  field  of  the  Christological  controversies 
should  be  compared  especially  the  already  cited  works  of  Petayixjs 
(torn.  iv.  De  incarnatione  Yerbi),  TTalch  (Ketzerhistorie,  vol.  v.-ix.), 
Baue,  and  Doenee.  The  special  literature  will  be  given  at  the  heads 
of  the  several  sections. 


§  135.     General  View.      The  Alexandrian  and  AnUochian 

Schools. 

The  Trinity  and  Christology,  the  two  hardest  problems  and 
most  comprehensive  dogmas  of  theology,  are  intimately  con- 
nected. Hence  the  settlement  of  the  one  was  immediately 
followed  by  the  agitation  and  study  of  the  other.  The  specu- 
lations on  the  Trinity  had  their  very  origin  in  the  study  of  the 
person  of  Christ,  and  led  back  to  it  again.  The  point  of  un- 
ion is  the  idea  of  the  incarnation  of  God.  But  in  the  Arian 
controversy  the  Son  of  God  was  viewed  mainly  in  his  essential, 
pre-mundane  relation  to  the  Father ;  while  in  the  Christo- 
logical contest  the  incarnate  historical  Christ  and  the  constitu- 
tion of  his  di^^ne-human  person  was  the  subject  of  dispute. 

Tlie  notion  of  redemption,  which  forms  the  centre  of  Chi'is- 

'  It  was  only  a  avvoios  ivSrifiovaa,  i.  e.,  a  council  of  the  bishops  just  then  in 
Constantinople,  and  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  the  fifth  ecumenical  council  at 
Constantinople  in  553,  which  decided  only  the  controversy  of  the  Three  Chapters. 
Comp.  Mansi,  Cone.  torn.  ix.  fol.  393-399  (where  the  fifteen  canons  are  given); 
Walch,  Ketzerhistorie,  vii.  660 ;  and  Gieseler,  K.  Gesch.  i.  ii.  p.  368. 

VOL.    II. 4:5 


706  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

tian  thinking,  demands  a  Redeemer  who  unites  in  his  person 
the  nature  of  God  and  tl}e  natm-e  of  man,  jet  without  confu- 
sion. In  order  to  be  a  true  Redeemer,  the  person  must  possess 
all  divine  attributes,  and  at  the  same  time  enter  into  all  rela- 
tions and  conditions  of  mankind,  to  raise  them  to  God.  Four 
elements  thus  enter  into  the  orthodox  doctrine  concerning 
Christ :  He  is  true  God  ;  he  is  true  man  ;  he  is  one  person  ; 
and  the  divine  and  human  in  him,  with  all  the  personal  union 
and  harmony,  remain  distinct. 

The  result  of  the  Arian  controversies  was  tlie  general  ac- 
knowledgment of  the  essential  and  eternal  deitj  of  Christ. 
Before  the  close  of  that  controversy  the  true  humanity  of 
Christ  at  the  same  time  came  in  again  for  treatment;  the 
church  having  indeed  always  maintained  it  against  the  Gnos- 
tic Docetism,  but  now,  against  a  partial  denial  by  Apollina- 
rianism,  having  to  express  it  still  more  distinctly  and  lay  stress 
on  the  reasonable  soul.  And  now  came  into  question,  further, 
the  relation  between  the  divine  and  the  human  natures  in 
Christ.  Origen,  who  gave  the  impulse  to  the  Arian  contro- 
versy, had  been  also  the  first  to  provoke  deeper  speculation  on 
the  mystery  of  the  person  of  Christ.  But  great  obscurity  and 
uncertainty  had  long  prevailed  in  opinions  on  this  great 
matter.  The  orthodox  Christology  is  the  result  of  powerful 
and  passionate  conflicts.  It  is  remarkable  that  the  notorious 
rabies  theologorum  has  never  in  any  doctrinal  controversy  so 
long  and  violently  raged  as  in  the  controversies  on  the  person 
of  the  Reconciler,  and  in  later  times  on  the  love-feast  of  recon- 
ciliation. 

The  Alexandrian  school  of  theology,  with  its  characteristic 
speculative  and  mystical  turn,  favored  a  connection  of  the 
divine  and  human  in  the  act  of  the  incarnation  so  close,  that 
it  was  in  danger  of  losing  the  human  in  the  divine,  or  at  least 
of  mixing  it  with  the  divine ; '  while,  conversely,  the  Antio- 

*  Even  Athanasius  is  not  wholly  free  from  this  leaning  to  the  monophysite  view, 
and  speaks  of  an  eVwa-is  (pvtriKri  of  the  Logos  with  his  flesh,  and  of  one  incarnate 
nature  of  the  divine  Logos,  /ti'a  (pv^Ls  tov  Qeov  \6yov  (TecrapKcofjLfvq,  which  with  his 
flesh  is  to  be  worshipped ;  see  his  little  tract  De  incarnatione  Dei  Verbi  (irspj  riji 
ffapKiiaewt  rov  Qeou  Koyov)  in  the  3d  torn,  of  the  Bened.  ed.  p.  1.     But  iu  the  first 


§   135.      THE   ALEXANDRIAN   AND   ANTIOCHIAN   SCHOOLS.     707 

chian  or  Syrian  scliool,  in  which  the  sober  intellect  and  reflec- 
tion prevailed,  inclined  to  the  opposite  extreme  of  an  abstract 
separation  of  the  two  natures.'  In  both  cases  the  mystery  of 
the  incarnation,  the  veritable  and  permanent  union  of  the 
divine  and  human  in  the  one  person  of  Christ,  which  is  essen- 
tial to  the  idea  of  a  Redeemer  and  Mediator,  is  more  or  less 
■weakened  or  altered.  In  the  former  case  the  incarnation 
becomes  a  transmutation  or  mixtm'e  {crvyKpaaa)  of  the  divine 
and  human ;  in  the  latter,  a  mere  indwelling  {ivoUrjaa)  of  the 
Logos  in  the  man,  or  a  moral  union  (avvdcfieca)  of  the  two 
natures,  or  rather  of  the  two  persons. 

It  was  now  the  problem  of  the  church,  in  opposition  to 
both  these  extremes,  to  assert  the  personal  unity  and  the  dis- 
tinction of  the  two  natures  in  Christ  with  equal  solicitude  and 
precision.  This  she  did  through  the  Christological  controver- 
sies which  ao;itated  the  Greek  church  for  more  than  two  hun- 
dred  years  with  extraordinary  violence.     The  Roman  church, 

place  it  must  be  considered  that  this  tract  (which  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  his 
large  work  De  incarnatione  Verbi  Dei,  irepl  ttjs  ivavS^pcDirriffecos  rod  \6yov,  in  the 
first  torn.  P.  i.  of  the  Bened.  ed.  pp.  47-97),  is  by  many  scholars  (Montfaucon,  Mohler, 
Hefele)  denied  to  Athanasius,  though  on  insuflScient  grounds ;  and  further,  that  at 
that  time  (pva-Ls,  oiKria,  and  bnocrradis  were  often  interchanged,  and  did  not  become 
sharply  distinguished  till  towards  the  end  of  the  Nicene  age.  "  In  the  indefiniteness 
of  the  notions  of  (pvais  and  un-tJo-Too-iy,"  says  Neander  (Dogmengeschichte,  i.  p.  340), 
"the  Alexandrians  were  the  more  easily  moved,  for  the  sake  of  the  one  uTro'o-Tao-ty, 
to  concede  also  only  one  (pixns  in  Christ,  and  set  the  evcoins  (pvatK^i  against  those 
who  talked  of  two  natures."  Comp.  Petavius,  De  incarn.  Verbi,  lib.  ii.  c.  3  (tom.  iv. 
p.  120,  de  vocabulis  (pvaews  et  uTroo-Taireaij) ;  also  the  observations  of  Dorner,  1.  c.  i. 
p.  1072,  and  of  Hefele,  ConciUengesch.  ii.  p.  128  f.  The  two  Gregories  speak,  in- 
deed, of  Suo  (pvcTfis  in  Christ,  yet  at  the  same  time  of  a  ciyKpafri^  and  avaKpaais, 
i.  e.,  mingling  of  the  two. 

'  Theodore,  bishop  of  Mopsuestia  in  Cilicia,  the  head  of  the  Antiochian  school, 
compares  the  union  of  the  divine  and  human  in  Christ  with  the  marriage  tmion  of 
man  and  woman,  and  says  that  one  cannot  conceive  a  complete  nature  without  a  com- 
plete person  (uttoVtoo-u).  Comp.  Neander,  L  c.  i.  p.  343 ;  Dorner,  ii.  p.  39  ff. ; 
Fritzsche:  De  Theodori  Mopsvest.  vita  et  scriptis,  Halae,  1837,  and  an  article  by 
W.  Moller  in  Herzog's  Encycl.  vol.  xv.  p.  715  ff.  Of  the  works  of  Theodore  of 
Mopsuestia  we  have  only  fragments,  chiefly  in  the  acts  of  the  fifth  ecumenical 
coimcil  (in  Mansi,  Cone.  tom.  ix.  fol.  203  sqq.),  and  a  commentary  on  the  twelve 
Prophets,  which  cardinal  Angelo  Mai  discovered,  and  edited  in  1854  at  Rome  in 
his  Nova  Bibliotheca  SS.  Patrum,  tom.  vii.  Pars  i.  pp.  1-408,  together  with  some 
fragments  of  commentaries  on  New  Testament  books,  edited  by  Fritzsche,  jun., 
Turici,  1847;  and  by  Pitra  in  Spicileg.  Solesm.  tom.  i.  Par.  1852. 


708  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-5^0. 

thougli  in  general  miicli  more  calm,  took  an  equally  deep 
interest  in  this  work  by  some  of  its  more  eminent  leaders,  and 
twice  decided  the  victory  of  orthodoxy,  at  the  fourth  general 
council  and  at  the  sixth,  by  the  powerful  influence  of  the 
bishop  of  Rome. 

We  must  distinguish  in  this  long  drama  five  acts : 

1.  The  Apollinaeian  controversy,  which  comes  in  tlie 
close  of  the  [Ricene  age,  and  is  concerned  with  the  full  hu- 
manity of  Christ,  that  is,  the  question  whether  Christ,  with 
his  human  body  and  human  soul  (anima  animans),  assumed 
also  a  human  spirit  (yoO?,  Trvevfia,  anima  rationalis).     , 

2.  The  Nestoeian  controversy,  down  to  the  rejection  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  double  personality  of  Christ  by  the  third  ecu- 
menical council  of  Ephesus,  a.  d.  431. 

3.  The  EcTTCHiAN  controversy,  to  the  condemnation  of 
the  doctrine  of  one  nature,  or  more  exactly  of  the  absorption 
of  the  human  in  the  divine  nature  of  Christ ;  to  the  fourth 
ecumenical  council  at  Chalcedon,  a.  d.  451. 

4.  The  MoNOPHTsriE  dispute  ;  the  partial  reaction  towards 
the  Eutychian  theory ;  down  to  the  fifth  general  council  at 
Constantinople,  a.  d.  553. 

5.  The  MoNOTHELiiE  controversy,  a.  d.  633-6S0,  which 
terminated  with  the  rejection  of  the  doctrine  of  one  will  in 
Christ  by  the  sixth  general  council  at  Constantinople  in  680, 
and  lies  this  side  of  our  period. 

§  136.     The  ApolUnarian  Heresy^  a.  d.  362-381. 
SOUECES. 

I.  Apolli^TAPJS  :  Ilept  (TapKcocrfwr, — Ilepi  7ri(TTecos, — Hepl  avaaTaafOis, — Kara 
K€(pa\eiov, — and  controversial  ■works  against  Porphyry,  and  Eunomius, 
biblical  commentaries,  and  epistles.  Only  fragments  of  these  remain 
in  the  answers  of  Gregory  of  Nyssa  and  Theodoret,  and  in  Angelo 
Mai :  Nov.  Biblioth.  Patrum,  torn.  vii.  (Eom.  1854),  Pars  secunda,  pp. 
82-91  (commentary  on  Ezekiel),  in  Leontius  Byzantinus,  and  in  the 
Catenje,  especially  the  Catena  in  Evang.  Joh.,  ed.  Corderius,  1630, 

IT.  Against  Apollinaris :  AiHANASirs  :  Contra  Apollinarium,  libri  ii. 
(ETepi    crapKOiaeois  rov   Kvpiov   rjfiuv  'I.  X.  Kara  ' AnoXXivapiov^  in   Opera, 

torn.  i.  pars  secunda,  pp.  921-955,  ed.  Bened.,  and  in  Thilo's  Bibl. 
Patr.  Gr.  dogm.,  vol.  i.  pp.  8G2-937).     This  work  was  written  about 


§   130.      THE  APOLLmAEIAN  HERESY.  709 

the  year  372  against  Apollinarianism  in  the  wider  sense,  without  nam- 
ing Apollinaris  or  his  followers;  so  that  the  title  above  given  is 
wanting  in  the  oldest  codices.  Similar  errors,  though  in  like  manner 
without  direct  reference  to  Apollinaris,  and  evading  his  most  impor- 
tant tenet,  were  combated  by  Athanasius  in  the  Epist.  ad  Epictetum 
episcopum  Corinthi  contra  ha^reticos  (0pp.  i.  ii.  900  sqq,,  and  in  Thilo, 
i.  p.  820  sqq.),  which  is  quoted  even  by  Epiphanius.  Geegoet  of 
Nyssa  :  Aoyos  dvTipjjTjTiiios  Trpos  to.  ' AnoWivapiov^  first  edited  by  L.  A. 
Zacagni  from  the  treasures  of  the  Vatican  library  in  the  unfortunately 
incomplete  Collectanea  monumentorum  veteram  ecclesiaa  Grtecse  et 
Latins),  Romse,  1698,  pp.  123-287,  and  then  by  Oallandi,  Bibliotheca 
Vet.  Patrum,  torn.  vi.  pp.  517-577.  Geegoet  Naz.  :  Epist.  ad  Necta- 
rium,  and  Ep.  i.  and  ii.  ad  Cledonium  (or  Orat.  46  and  51-52 ;  comp. 
UUmann's  Gregor  v.  Naz.  p.  401  sqq.).  Basilius  M".  :  Epist.  265 
(a.  d.  377),  in  the  new  Bened.  ed.  of  his  Opera,  Par.  1839,  torn.  iii. 
Pars  ii.  p.  591  sqq.  Epiphanius  :  H^r.  77.  Theodoeet  :  Fabul.  beer, 
iv.  8  ;  V.  9 ;  and  Diolog.  i.-iii. 

LITERATUPvE. 

Dion.  Petavitis  :  De  incarnatione  Verbi,  lib.  i.  cap.  6  (in  the  fourth  vol. 
of  the  Theologicorum  dogmatum,  pp.  24^34,  ed.  Par.  1650).  Jac. 
Basnage:  Dissert,  de  hist.  h^er.  Apollinar.  Ultraj.  1687.  C.  W.  F. 
Waloh:  1.  c.  iii.  119-229.  Baup.:  1.  c.  vol.  i.  pp.  585-647.  Dornee: 
1.  c.  i.  pp.  974-1080.  H.  VoiGT :  Die  Lehre  des  Athanasius,  &c. 
Bremen.  1861.    Pp.  306-345. 

Apollinaris/  bishop  of  Laodicea  in  Syria,  was  the  first  to 
apply  the  results  of  the  trinitarian  discussions  of  the  Nicene  age 
to  Christology,  and  to  introduce  the  long  Christological  contro- 
Tersies.  He  was  the  first  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Church 
to  the  psychical  and  pneumatic  side  of  the  humanity  of  Christ, 
and  by  contradiction  brought  out  the  doctrine  of  a  reasonable 
human  soul  in  him  more  clearly  and  definitely  than  it  had  be- 
fore been  conceived. 

Apollinaris,  like  his  father  (Apollinaris  the  Elder,  who 
was  a  native  of  Alexandria,  and  a  presbyter  in  Laodicea),  was 
distinguished  for  piety,  classical  culture,  a  scholarly  vindication 

'  The  name  is  usually  written  Apollinaris,  even  by  Petavius,  Baur,  and  Dorner, 
and  by  all  English  writers.  We  have  no  disposition  to  disturb  the  established  usage 
in  a  matter  of  so  little  moment.  But  the  Greek  fathers  always  write  'K-KoWivapws, 
and  hence  Apollinarins  (as  in  Jerome,  De  viris  Ulustr.,  c.  104)  is  more  strictly 
correct. 


TIO  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-690. 

of  Christianity  against  Porpliyiy  and  the  emperor  Julian,  and 
adhesion  to  the  !Nicene  faith.  He  was  highly  esteemed,  too, 
by  Athanasins,  who,  perhaps  through  personal  forbearance, 
never  mentions  him  by  name  in  his  writings  against  his  error. 
But  in  his  zeal  for  the  true  deity  of  Christ,  and  his  fear  of  a 
double  personality,  he  fell  into  the  error  of  denying  his  integral 
humanity.  Adopting  the  psychological  trichotomy,  he  attributed 
to  Christ  a  human  body,  and  a  human  (animal)  soul,'  but  not  a 
human  spirit  or  reason ;  ^  putting  the  divine  Logos  in  the  place 
of  the  human  spirit.  In  opposition  to  the  idea  of  a  mere  connec- 
tion of  the  Logos  with  the  man  Jesus,  he  wished  to  secure  an  or- 
ganic unity  of  the  two,  and  so  a  true  incarnation ;  but  he  sought 
jj,  this  at  the  expense  of  the  most  important  constituent  of  man. 

/"^^  ^  He  reaches  only  a^eo?  aapKo^opog:,  as  ISTestorianism  only  an 
„  .  f  _^  i^at-.av^pcoTTo^  ^eocpopo'^,  instead  of  the  proper  ^edv'^pcoTro^.  He  ap- 
^  '-'  pealed  to  the  facf^that  the  Scripture  says,  the  wordTwas  made 
flesh — not  spirit  f  God  was  manifest  in  the  flesh,  &c. }  to  which 
Gregory  E  azianzen  justly  replied  that  in  these  passages  the 
term  adp^  was  used  by  synecdoche  for  the  whole  human  nature. 
In  this  way  Apollinaris  established  so  close  a  connection  of 
the  Logos  with  human  flesh,  that  all  the  divine  attributes  were 
transferred  to  the  human  nature,  and  all  the  human  attributes 
to  the  divine,  and  the  two  were  merged  in  one  nature  in  Christ. 
Hence  he  could  speak  of  a  crucifixion  of  the  Logos,  and  a  wor- 
ship of  his  flesh.  He  made  Christ  a  middle  being  between 
God  and  man,  in  whom,  as  it  were,  one  part  divine  and  two 
parts  human  were  fused  in  the  unity  of  a  new  nature.* 

"  'Vvxh  &>^oyos,  the  inward  vitality  which  man  has  in  common  with  animals. 

'  tJovs,  wvev/jLa,  or  the  ^vxh  A-o^f/crj,  anima  rationalis,  the  motive,  self-active,  free  ele- 
ment, the  avroKivriTov,  the  thinking  and  willing,  immortal  spirit,  which  distinguishes 
man  from  animals.  Apollinaris  followed  the  psychological  trichotomy  of  Plato. 
'O  aj'&pwTTos,  says  he  in  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  ds  ianv  e/c  -Kvilfiaros  koI  cpvxv^  Koi  adi- 
ixaros,  for  which  he  quotes  1  Thess.  v.  23,  and  Gal.  v.  17.  But  in  another  fragment 
he  designates  the  whole  spiritual  principle  in  man  by  ^vx^)-,  and  makes  the  place  of 
it  in  Christ  to  be  supplied  by  the  Logos.  Comp.  the  passages  in  Gieseler,  vol.  i. 
Div.  ii.  p.  73  (4th  ed.).  From  this  time  the  triple  division  of  human  nature  was  un- 
justly accounted  heterodox. 

^  He  even  ventured  to  adduce  created  analogies,  such  as  the  mule,  midway  be- 
tv.een  the  horse  and  the  ass;  the  grey  co^or,  a  mixture  of  white  and  black;  and 


§   136.      THE   APOLLINARIAN   HERESY.  711 

Epiphanius  expresses  himself  concerning  the  beginning  of 
the  controversy  in  these  unusually  lenient  and  respectful  terms : 
"  Some  of  our  brethren,  who  are  in  high  position,  and  who  are 
held  in  great  esteem  with  us  and  all  the  orthodox,  have  thought 
that  the  spirit  (o  vov<;)  should  be  excluded  from  the  manifesta- 
tion of  Christ  in  the  flesh,  and  have  prefeiTed  to  hold  that  our 
Lord  Christ  assumed  flesh  and  soul,  but  not  our  spirit,  and 
therefore  not  a  perfect  man.  The  aged  and  venerable  Apolli- 
naris  of  Laodicea,  dear  even  to  the  blessed  father  Athanasius, 
and  in  fact  to  all  the  orthodox,  has  been  the  first  to  frame  and 
promulgate  this  doctrine.  At  first,  when  some  of  his  disciples 
communicated  it  to  us,  we  were  unwilling  to  believe  that  such 
a  man  would  put  this  doctrine  in  circulation.  We  supposed 
'that  the  disciples  had  not  understood  the  deep  thoughts  of  so 
learned  and  so  discerning  a  man,  and  had  themselves  fabricated 
things  which  he  did  not  teach,"  &c. 

So  early  as  362,  a  council  at  Alexandria  rejected  this  doc- 
trine (though  without  naming  the  author),  and  asserted  that 
Christ  possessed  a  reasonable  soul.  But  Apollinaris  did  not 
secede  from  the  communion  of  the  Church,  and  begin  to  form 
a  sect  of  his  own,  till  3Y5.  He  died  in  390.  His  writings, 
except  numerous  fragments  in  the  works  of  his  opponents,  are 
lost. 

Apollinaris,  therefore,  taught  the  deity  of  Christ,  but  de- 
nied the  completeness  {reXeiorrj'i)  of  his  humanity,  and,  taking 
his  departure  from  the  Nicene  postulate  of  the  homoozision,  ran 
into  the  Arian  heresy,  which  likewise  put  the  divine  Logos  in 
the  place  of  the  human  spirit  in  Christ,  but  which  asserted  be- 
sides this  the  changeableness  (rpeTTTOT?;?)  of  Christ;  while 
Apollinaris,  on  the  contrary,  aimed  to  establish  more  firmly 
the  unchangeableness  of  Christ,  to  beat  the  Arians  with  their 
own  weapons,  and  provide  a  better  vindication  of  the  ISTicene 
dogma.  He  held  the  union  of  full  divinity  with  full  humanity 
in  one  person,  therefore,  of  two  wholes  in  one  whole,  to  be  im- 
possible.'    He  supposed  the  unity  of  the  person  of  Christ,  and 

.4 

spring  in  distinction  from  winter  and  summer.     Christ,  says  lie,  is  ovre  &v^puToi 
oAos,  oijre  i&eb?,  oA.A.a  beov  icai  av^pdoirov  fxi^is. 

'  Tlie  result  of  this  construction  he  called  av^punS&eoT,  a  sort  of  monstrosity, 


712  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

at  the  same  time  his  sinlessness,  could  be  saved  only  by  tbe 
excision  of  tlie  human  spirit ;  since  sin  has  its  seat,  not  in  the 
will-less  soul,  nor  in  the  body,  but  in  the  mtelligent,  free,  and 
therefore  changeable  will  or  spirit  of  man.  He  also  charged 
the  Church  doctrine  of  the  full  humanity  of  Christ  with  limit- 
ing the  atoning  suffering  of  Christ  to  the  human  nature,  and 
so  detracting  from  the  atoning  virtue  of  the  work  of  Christ ; 
for  the  death  of  a  man  could  not  destroy  death.  The  divine 
nature  must  participate  in  the  suffering  throughout.  His  oppo- 
nents, for  this  reason,  charged  him  with  making  deity  suffer 
and  die.  He  made,  however,  a  distinction  between  two  sides 
of  the  Logos,  the  one  allied  to  man  and  capable  of  suffering, 
and  the  other  allied  to  God  and  exalted  above  all  suffering. 
The  relation  of  the  divine  pneumatic  nature  in  Christ  to  the 
human  psychical  and  bodily  nature  Apollinaris  illustrated 
by  the  mingling  of  wine  and  water,  the  glowing  fire  in  the 
iron,  and  the  union  of  soul  and  body  in  man,  which,  though 
distinct,  interpenetrate  and  form  one  thing. 

His  doctrine,  however,  in  particulars,  is  variously  repre- 
sented, and  there  arose  among  his  disciples  a  complex  mass  of 
opinions,  some  of  them  differing  strongly  from  one  another. 
According  to  one  statement  Apollinaris  asserted  that  Christ 
brought  even  his  human  nature  from  heaven,  and  was  from 
eternity  €vaapKo<i',  according  to  another  this  was  merely  an 
opinion  of  his  disciples,  or  an  uuv.'arranted  inference  of  oppo- 
nents from  his  assertion  of  an  eternal  determination  to  incarna- 
tion, and  from  his  strong  emphasizing  of  the  union  of  the  Logos 
with  the  flesh  of  Christ,  which  allowed  that  even  the  flesh 
might  be  worshipped  without  idolatry.' 

which  he  put  in  the  same  category  with  the  mythological  figures  of  the  minotaur, 
the  well-lmown  Cretan  monster  with  human  body  and  bull's  head,  or  the  body  of  a 
bull  and  the  head  of  a  man.  But  the  Apollinarian  idea  of  the  union  of  the  Logos 
with  a  truncated  human  nature  might  be  itself  more  justly  compared  with  this 
monster.  j 

*  Corner,  who  has  treated  tliis  section  of  the  history  of  Christology,  as  well  as 
others,  with  great  thoroughness,  says,  i.  977:  "That  the  school  of  Apollinaris  did 
not  remain  in  all  points  consistent  with  itself,  nor  true  to  its  founder,  is  certain ;  but 
it  is  less  certain  whether  Apollinaris  himself  always  taught  the  same  thing."  Theo- 
doret  charges  him  with  a  change  of  opinion,  which  Corner  attributes  to  different 
stages  of  the  development  of  his  system. 


§   136.      THE   APOLLINAKIAN    HERESY.  713 

The  Chui'di  could  not  possibly  accept  such  a  half  Doce- 
tistic  incarnation,  such  a.  mutilated  and  stunted  humanity  of 
Christ,  despoiled  of  its  royal  head,  and  such  a  merely  partial 
redemption  as  this  inevitably  involved.  The  incarnation  of  the 
Logos  is  his  becoming  completely  man.'  It  involves,  therefore, 
his  assumption  of  the  entire  undivided  nature  of  man,  s-piritual 
and  bodily,  with  the  sole  exception  of  sin,  which  in  fact  belongs 
not  to  the  original  nature  of  man,  but  has  entered  from  with- 
out, as  a  foreign  poison,  through  the  deceit  of  the  devil.  Many 
things  in  the  life  of  Jesus  imply  a  reasonable  soul :  sadness, 
anguish,  and  prayer.  The  spirit  is  just  the  most  essential  and 
most  noble  constituent  of  man,  the  controlling  principle,*  and 
it  stands  in  the  same  need  of  redemption  as  the  soul  and  the 
body.  Had  the  Logos  not  assumed  the  human  spirit,  he  would 
not  have  been  true  man  at  all,  and  could  not  have  been  our 
example.  Nor  could  he  have  redeemed  the  spirit ;  and  a  half- 
redemption  is  no  redemption  at  all.  To  be  a  full  Redeemer, 
Christ  must  also  be  fully  man,  reXeco^  dv^p(i)7ro<i.  This  was  the 
weighty  doctrinal  result  of  the  Apollinarian  controversy. 

Athanasius,  the  two  Gregories,  Basil,  and  Epiphanius  com- 
bated the  Apollinarian  error,  but  with  a  certain  embarrass- 
ment, attacking  it  rather  from  behind  and  from  the  flank,  than 
in  front,  and  unprepared  to  answer  duly  its,  main  point,  that 
two  integral  persons  cannot  form  one  person.  The  later  ortho- 
dox doctrine  surmounted  this  difficulty  by  teaching  the  imper- 
sonality of  the  human  nature  of  Christ,  and  by  making  the 
personality  of  Christ  to  reside  wholly  in  the  Logos. 

The  councils  at  Rome  under  Damasus,  in  377  and  378,  and 
likewise  the  second  ecumenical  council,  in  381,  condemned  the 
Apollinarians.'  Imperial  decrees  pursued  them,  in  388,  397, 
and  428.  Some  of  them  returned  into  the  catholic  church ; 
others  mingled  with  the  Monophj^sites,  for  whose  doctrine 
Apollinaris  had,  in  some  measure,  prepared  the  way. 

'  'Ex/crapK&xns  is  at  the  same  time  ifav^panr-qcm.    Christ  was  really  av^poinos,  not 
merely  is  &uS)pa>Tros,  as  Apollinaris  taught  on  the  strength  of  Phil.  ii.  T. 
Tj)  KvpitiraTov. 

^  Cone.  Constant,  i.  cm.  1,  where,  with  the  Arians,  semi-Arians,  Pneumatomachi, 
Sabellians,  and  Marcellians  or  Photinians,  the  ApoUinarians  also  are  anathematized. 


714  THIRD  PEEIOD.   A.D.    311-590. 

WittL  the  rejection  of  tliis  error,  however,  the  question  of 
the  proper  relation  of  the  divine  and  human  natures  in  Christ 
was  not  yet  solved,  but  rather  for  the  first  time  fairly  raised. 
Those  church  teachers  proved  the  necessity  of  a  reasonable 
human  soul  in  Christ.  But  respecting  the  mode  of  the  union 
of  the  two  natures  their  views  were  confused  and  their  expres- 
sions in  some  cases  absolutely  incorrect  and  misleading.'  It 
was  through  the  succeeding  stages  of  the  Christological  contro- 
versies that  the  church  first  reached  a  clear  insight  into  this 
great  mystery :  God  manifest  in  the  flesh. 


§  137.     The  Nestorian  Controversy,  a.  d.  428-431. 

SOURCES. 

I.  Nestoeius:    'OfiiXlai,  Sermones;  Anathematismi.      Extracts  from  the 

Greek  original  in  tlie  Acts  of  the  council  of  Ephesus  ;  in  a  Latin  trans- 
lation in  Mariits  Mercator,  a  North  African  layman  who  just  then  re- 
sided in  Constantinople,  Opera,  ed.  Garnerius,  Par.  1673.  Pars  ii,  and 
better  ed.  Baluzius,  Par.  1684;  also  in  Gallandi,  Bibl.  vet.  P.  P.  viii. 
pp.  615-735,  and  in  Migne's  Patrol,  torn.  48.  Nestorius'  own  account 
(Evagr.  H.  E.  i.  7)  was  used  by  his  friend  Ieen^eus  (comes,  then  bishop 
of  Tyre  till  448)  in  his  Tragodia  s.  comm.  de  rebus  in  synodo  Ephesina 
ac  in  Orients  toto  gestis,  which,  however,  is  lost ;  the  documents 
attached  to  it  were  revised  in  the  6th  century  in  the  Synodicon  adver- 
sus  tragoediam  Irena3i,  in  Mansi,  tom.  v.  fol.  731  sqq.  In  favor  of  ISTes- 
torius,  or  at  least  of  his  doctrine,  Theodoret  (t  457)  in  his  works 
against  Cyril,  and  in  three  dialogues  entitled  ^Epavi(TTT]s  (Beggar). 
Comp.  also  the  fragments  of  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  (t  429). 

II.  Against  Nestorius :  Cteil  of  Alex.  :  'Ai/aSe/iana-juoi,  Five  Books  Kara 

Neo-ropj'ou,  and  several  Epistles  against  Nest.,  and  Theod.,  in  vol.  vi.  of 
Aubert's  ed.  of  his  Opera,  Par.  1638  (in  Migne's  ed.  t.  ix.).  Socrates  : 
vii.  c.  29-35  (written  after  431,  but  still  before  the  death  of  Nestorius; 
comp.  c.  34).  EvAGRius :  H.  E.  i.  2-7.  Liberatus  (deacon  of  Car- 
thage about  553)  :  Breviarium  causae  Nestorianorum  et  Eutychianorum 
(ed.  Garnier,  Par.  1675,  and  printed  in  Gallandi,  Bibl.  vet.  Patr.  tom. 
xii.  pp.  121-161).  Leontiu^  Btzant.  (monachus) :  Desectis;  and  con- 
tra Nestorium  et  Eutychen  (in  Gallandi,  Bibl.  tom.  xii.  p.  625  sqq.,  and 
658-700).  A  complete  collection  of  all  the  acts  of  the  Nestorian  con- 
troversy in  Mansi,  tom.  iv.  fol.  567  sqq.,  and  tom.  v.  vii.  ix. 

'  This  is  true  even  of  Athanasius.    Comp.  the  note  on  him  in  §  135,  p.  706  f. 


§   137.      THE   NESTOEIAN   CONTKOVERST.  715 

LATER  LITERATURE. 

PETAJirs :  Theolog.  dogmatum  torn.  iv.  (de  incarnatione),  lib.  i.  c.  7  sqq. 
Jo.  Gaeniee  :  De  haeresi  et  libris  Nestorii  (ia  his  edition  of  the  Opera 
Marii  Mercator.  Par.  1673,  newly  edited  by  Migne,  Par.  1846).  Gib- 
*  bon:  Decline  and  Pall  of  the  R.  E.  ch.  47.  P.  E.  Jablonski:  DeNes- 
torianismo.  Berol.  172-4.  Gexglee  (R.  0.) :  Ueber  die  Verdammung 
des  Nestoriua  (Tubinger  Quartalschrift,  1835,  No.  2).  ScHEocKn :  K. 
Geschichte,  vol.  xviii,  pp.  176-312.  "Waloh:  Ketzerhist.  v.  289-936. 
Neandee  :  K.  Gesch.  vol.  iv.  pp.  856-992.  Gieselee  :  vol.  i.  Div.  11. 
pp.  131  IF.  (4th  ed.),  Baue  :  Dreieiuigkeit,  vol.  i.  693-777.  Dorner  : 
Christologie,  vol.  ii.  pp.  60-98.  Hefele  (R.  C.)  :  Oonciliengesch.,  vol. 
li.  pp.  134  ff.  H.  H.  Milman:  History  of  Latin  Christianity,  vol.  i. 
ch.  lii.  pp.  195-252.  (Stanley,  in  his  History  of  the  Eastern  Church, 
has  seen  fit  to  ignore  the  Nestorian,  and  the  other  Christological  con- 
troversies— the  most  important  In  the  history  of  the  Greek  church !) 
Comp.  also  "W.  Moller  :  Article  Nestorius,  in  Herzog^s  Theol.  Encykl. 
vol.  s.  (1858)  pp.  288-296,  and  the  relevant  sections  In  the  works  on 
Doctrine  History. 

ApoLLmAKiANisM,  wliicli  Sacrificed  to  the  unity  of  the  person 
the  integrity  of  the  natures,  at  least  of  the  human  nature,  an- 
ticipated the  Monophysite  heresy,  though  in  a  peculiar  way, 
and  formed  the  precise  countei-part  to  the  Antiochian  doctrine, 
which  was  developed  about  the  same  time,  and  somewhat  later 
by  Diodorus,  bishop  of  Tarsus  (died  394),  and  TJieodore,  bishop 
of  Mopsuestia  (393-428),  and  which  held  the  divine  and  human 
in  Christ  so  rigidly  apart  as  to  make  Christ,  though  not  pro- 
fessedly, yet  virtually  a  double  person. 

From  this  school  proceeded  Nestorius,  the  head  and  mar- 
tyr of  the  Christological  heresy  which  bears  his  name.  His 
doctrine  differs  from  that  of  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  only  in 
being  less  speculative  and  more  practical,  and  still  less  solici- 
tous for  the  unity  of  the  person  of  Christ.'  He  was  originally 
a  monk,  then  presbyter  in  Antioch,  and  after  428  patriarch  of 
Constantinople.  In  Constantinople  a  second  Chrysostom  was 
expected  in  him,  and  a  restorer  of  the  honor  of  his  great  prede- 
cessor against  the  detraction  of  his  Alexandrian  rival.  He 
was  an  honest  man,  of  great  eloquence,  monastic  piety,  and  the 
spirit  of  a  zealot  for  orthodoxy,  but  impetuous,  vain,  imprudent, 

'  So  Domer  also  states  the  difference,  vol.  ii.  p.  62  f. 


716  THIRD  PERIOD.   A.D.    311-590. 

and  wanting  in  sound,  practical  judgment.  In  his  inaugural 
sermon  lie  addressed  Theodosius  II.  with  these  words :  "  Give 
me,  0  emperor,  the  earth  purified  of  heretics,  and  I  will  give 
thee  heaven  for  it ;  help  me  to  fight  the  heretics,  and  I  will 
help  thee  to  fight  the  Persians."  ' 

He  immediately  instituted  violent  measures  against  Arians, 
Kovatians,  Quartodecimanians,  and  Macedonians,  and  incited 
the  emperor  to  enact  more  stringent  laws  against  heretics. 
The  Pelagians  alone,  with  whose  doctrine  of  free  will  (but  not 
of  original  sin)  he  sympathized,  he  treated  indulgently,  receiv- 
ing to  himself  Julian  of  Eclanum,  Ccelestius,  and  other  banished 
leaders  of  that  party,  interceding  for  them  in  429  with  the 
emperor  and  with  the  pope  Celestine,  though,  on  account  of 
the  very  unfavorable  reports  concerning  Pelagianism  which 
were  spread  by  the  layman  Marius  Mercator,  then  living  in 
Constantinople,  his  intercessions  were  of  no  avail.  By  reason 
of  this  partial  contact  of  the  two,  Pelagianism  was  condemned 
by  the  council  of  Ephesus  together  with  Nestorianism. 

But  now  JN  estorius  himself  fell  out  with  the  prevailing  faith 
of  the  church  in  Constantinople.  The  occasion  was  his  oppo- 
sition to  the  certainly  very  bold  and  equivocal  expression 
mother  of  God,  which  had  been  already  sometimes  applied  to 
the  virgin  Mary  by  Origen,  Alexander  of  Alexandria,  Athana- 
sius,  Basil,  and  others,  and  which,  after  the  Arian  controversy, 
and  with  the  growth  of  the  worship  of  Mary,  passed  into  the 
devotional  language  of  the  peoj)le.'^ 

It  was  of  com'se  not  the  sense,  or  monstrous  nonsense,  of 
this  term,  that  the  creatm'e  bore  the  Creator,  or  that  the  eternal 
Deity  took  its  beginning  from  Mary ;  which  would  be  the  most 
absurd  and  the  most  wicked  of  all  heresies,  and  a  shocking 

*  Socrates,  H.  E.,  vii.  29. 

"^  QforSicos,  Deipara,  genitrix  Dei,  mater  Dei.  On  the  earlier  use  of  this  word 
comp.  Petavius :  De  incarnatione,  lib.  v.  c.  15  (torn.  iv.  p.  411  sqq.,  Paris  ed.  of 
1650).  In  the  Bible  the  expression  does  not  occur,  and  only  the  approximate  uriT-qp 
rod  Kvpiov,  in  Luke  i.  43  ;  but  fi-nrrip  'IrjtroD,  on  the  contrary,  is  frequent.  Cyril  ap- 
peals to  Gal.  iv.  4 :  "  God  sent  forth  his  Son,  made  of  a  woman."  To  the  Protestant 
mind  SkotSkos  is  offensive  on  account  of  its  undeniable  connection  with  the  Eoman 
Catholic  worship  of  Mary,  which  certainly  reminds  us  of  the  pagan  mothers  of  gods. 
Comp.  §§  82  and  83, 


§    137.      THE   NESTOEIAN   CONTEOYEKSY.  717 

blaspliemy ;  but  the  expression  -was  intended  only  to  denote 
the  indissoluble  union  of  tlie  divine  and  human  natures  in 
Christ,  and  the  veritable  incarnation  of  the  Logos,  who  took 
the  human  nature  from  the  body  of  Mary,  came  forth  God-Man 
from  her  -womb,  and  as  God-Man  suffered  on  the  cross.  For 
Christ  was  borne  as  2i.  person,  and  suffered  as  a  person  ^  and 
the  personality  in  Christ  resided  in  his  divinity,  not  in  his  hu- 
manity. So,  in  fact,  the  reasonable  soul  of  man,  which  is 
the  centre  of  the  human  personality,  participates  in  the  suffer- 
ing and  the  death-struggle  of  the  body,  though  the  soul  itself 
does  not  and  cannot  die. 

The  Antiochian  theology,  however,  could  not  conceive  a 
human  nature  without  a  human  personality,  and  this  it  strictly 
separated  from  the  divine  Logos.  Therefore  Theodore  of  Mop- 
suestia  had  already  disputed  the  term  theotolcos  with  all  earnest- 
ness. "  Mary,"  says  he,  "  bore  Jesus,  not  the  Logos,  for  the 
Logos  was,  and  continues  to  be,  omnipresent,  though  he  dwelt 
in  Jesus  in  a  special  manner  from  the  beginning.  Therefore 
Mary  is  strictly  the  mother  of  Christ,  not  the  mother  of  God. 
Only  in  a  figui'e,  per  anaphoram,  can  she  be  called  also  the 
mother  of  God,  because  God  was  in  a  peculiar  sense  in  Chiist, 
Properly  speaking,  she  gave  birth  to  a  man  in  whom  the  union 
with  the  Logos  had  begun,  but  was  still  so  incomplete  that  he 
could  not  yet  (till  after  his  baptism)  be  called  the  Son  of  God." 
He  even  declared  it  ".insane"  to  say  that  God  was  born  of  the 
Virgin ;  "  not  God,  but  the  temple  in  which  God  dwelt,  was 
born  of  Mary." 

In  a  similar  strain  IS^estorius,  and  his  friend  Anastasius,  a 
priest  whom  he  had  brought  with  him  from  Antioch,  argued 
from  the  pulpit  against  the  theotokojb.  ISTestorius  claimed  that  j. 
he  found  the  controversy  already  existing  in  Constantinople, 
because  some  were  calling  Mary  mother  of  God  (^eoTOKo^s), 
others,  mother  of  Man  {av^poyiroTOKo^).  He  proposed  the 
middle  expression,  mother  of  Christ  {XpLo-roroKos),  because 
Christ  was  at  the  same  time  God  and  man.  He  delivered 
several  discourses  on  this  disputed  point.  "  You  ask,"  says  he 
in  his  first  sermon,  "  whether  Mary  may  be  called  mother  of 
God.     Has  God  then  a  mother  ?     If  so,  heathenism  itself  is 


718  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

excusable  in  assigning  mothers  to  its  gods ;  but  then  Paul  is  a 
liar,  for  he  said  of  the  deity  of  Christ  that  it  was  without 
father,  without  mother,  and  without  descent/  ISo,  mj  dear 
sir,  Mary  did  not  bear  God ;  .  .  .  the  creature  bore  not  the  un- 
created Creator,  but  the  man  who  is  the  instrument  of  the  God- 
head ;  the  Holy  Ghost  conceived  uot  the  Logos,  but  formed 
for  him,  out  of  the  virgin,  a  temple  which  he  might  inhabit 
(John  ii.  21).  The  incarnate  God  did  not  die,  but  quickened 
him  in  whom  he  was  made  flesh.  .  .  .  This  garment,  which 
he  used,  I  honor  on  account  of  the  God  which  was  covered 
therein  and  inseparable  therefrom;  .  .  .  I  separate  the  natures^ 
'but  I  unite  the  worship.  Consider  what  this  must  mean.  He 
who  was  formed  in  the  womb  of  Mary,  was  not  himself  God, 
but  God  assumed  him  [assuinsit,  i.  e.,  clothed  himself  with 
humanity],  and  on  account  of  Him  who  assumed,  he  who  was 
assumed  is  also  called  Godr  ' 

From  this  word  the  Kestorian  controversy  took  its  rise ;  but 
this  word  represented,  at  the  same  time,  a  theological  idea  and 
a  mighty  religious  sentiment ;  it  was  intimately  connected  with 
the  growing  veneration  of  Mary ;  it  therefore  struck  into  the 
field  of  devotion,  which  lies  much  nearer  the  people  than  that 
of  speculative  theology ;  and  thus  it  touched  the  most  vehe- 
ment passions.  The  word  theotoJcos  was  the  watchword  of  the 
orthodox  party  in  the  l^estorian  controversy,  as  the  term 
homoousios  had  been  in  the  Arian ;  and  opposition  to  this  word 
meant  denial  of  the  mystery  of  the  incarnation,  or  of  the  true 
union  of  the  divine  and  human  natures  in  Christ. 

And  unquestionably  the  Antiochian  Christology,  which  was 
represented  by  Nestorius,  did  not  make  the  Logos  truly  'become 
man.  It  asserted  indeed,  rightly,  the  duality  of  the  natures, 
and  the  continued  distinction  between  them ;  it  denied,  with 
equal  correctness,  that  God,  as  such,  could  either  be  born,  or 
suffer  and  die  ;  but  it  pressed  the  distinction  of  the  two  natures 
to  double  personality.     It  substituted  for  the  idea  of  the  incar- 

'  Heb.  vii.  3  :  airaTwp,  aurjTccp,  Sreu  yepeaXoyias. 

^  In  the  original  in  Mansi,  iv.  1 197  ;  in  a  Latin  translation  in  Marius  Mcrcator, 
ed.  Gamier,  Migne,  p.  16^  ff.  Comp.  this  and  similar  passages  also  in  Hefele, 
ii.  p.  13*7,  and  Gieseler,  i.  2,  139. 


§    137.      THE   NESTOKIAN   CONTROVEKSY.  719 

nation  the  idea  of  an  assumption  of  human  nature,  or  rather 
of  an  entire  man,  into  fello-vvship  with  the  Logos,'  and  an  in- 
dwelling of  Godhead  in  Christ,"  Instead  of  God-Man,'  we 
have  here  the  idea  of  a  mere  God-bearing  man  ;*  and  the  per- 
son of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  only  the  instrument  or  the  temple,* 
in  which  the  divine  Logos  dwells.  The  two  natures  form  not 
a  personal  unity,^  but  only  a  moral  unity,  an  intimate  friend- 
ship or  conjunction.''  They  hold  an  outward,  mechanical  rela- 
tion to  each  other,*  in  which  each  retains  its  peculiar  attributes,^ 
forbidding  any  sort  of  communicatio  idiomatum.  This  union 
is,  in  the  first  place,  a  gracious  condescension  on  the  part  of 
God,'"  whereby  the  Logos  makes  the  man  an  object  of  the 
divine  pleasure ;  and  in  the  second  place,  an  elevation  of  the 
man  to  higher  dignity  and  to  sonship  with  God."  By  vii'tue 
of  the  condescension  there  arises,  in  the  third  place,  a  practical 
fellowship  of  operation,"^  in  which  the  humanity  becomes  the 
instrument  and  temple  of  the  deity  and  the  ei^coo-i?  c^enKr]  cul- 
minates. Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  the  able  founder  of  the 
Antiochian  Christology,  set  forth  the  elevation  of  the  man  to 
sonship  with  God  (starting  from  Luke  ii.  53)  under  the  aspect  of 
a  gradual  moral  process,  and  made  it  dependent  on  the  pro- 
gressive virtue  and  meritoriousness  of  Jesus,  which  were  com- 
pleted in  the  resurrection,  and  earned  for  him  the  unchangea- 

'  npoVXrjij/is.  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  says  (Act.  Cone.  Ephes.  in  Mansi,  iv.  fol. 
1349):  'O  Seo-TTi^Tijs  Sebj  Ao'7or  i.vh  p<j>it  ov  el  \  ripe  t  e  A.  e  i  o  ;/ (hominem  per- 
fectum  assumpsit),  instead  of  (picnv  av^punrov  eiATj^e,  or  (rop|  iy^vero. 

^  'Ei'oiKTjo'iy,  in  distinction  from  ivaapKoicns. 

^  Qfdv^puiTos. 

*  Qeo(p6pos,  also  ^eoSoxos,  from  5ex€<T.&ai,  God-assuming. 

'  Instrumentum,  templum,  vaSs,  a  favorite  term  with  the  Nestorians. 

^  "Evoktis  )ca&'  inroffTaffiv. 

'  2i/)'d(j)eia,  connection,  affinity,  intercourse,  attachment,  in  distinction  from 
(vaiffis,  true  interior  union.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  charges  Xestorius,  in  his  Epist.  ad 
Coelestinum  :  ieiryet  TraPTaxov  rh  Xtyeiv,  rrjv  'ivuaiv,  aW'  6voiJ.a(ei  rrjv  aw  d- 
^  f  I  ay ,    Siairep  eaTiv  o  t^w^ey. 

*  "Ewwai!  (TxeTiKjj,  a  unity  of  relation  (from  (Tx^cfs,  condition,  relation)  in  dis- 
tinction from  a  evaicm  (pvcrixri,  or  ffiiyKpa<rts,  physical  unity  Or  commixture. 

Evwcri^  Kara  X^P"')  C""  '"'■'■'  (vSoKiau. 
'  "Evutfis  Kar   a^iap,  Kay  vlo^ejiav. 
*'  "EvciKTis  kut'  ivfpynav. 


720  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

bleness  of  tlie  divine  life  as  a  reward  for  liis  voluntary  victory 
of  virtue. 

The  Antiocliian  and  l*Testorian  theory  amounts  therefore, 
at  bottom,  to  a  duality  of  person  in  Christ,  though  without 
clearly  avowing  it.  It  cannot  conceive  the  reality  of  the  two 
natures  without  a  personal  independence  for  each.  With  the 
theanthropic  unity  of  the  person  of  Christ  it  denies  also  the 
theanthi'ojDic  unity  of  his  work,  especially  of  his  sufferings  and 
death ;  and  in  the  same  measure  it  enfeebles  the  reality  of 
redemption.^ 

From  this  point  of  view  Mary,  of  course,  could  be  nothing 
more  than  mother  of  the  man  Jesus,  and  the  predicate  theoto- 
kos,  strictly  understood,  must  appear  absurd  or  blasphemous. 
l!Testoriu3  would  admit  no  more  than  that  God  passed  tlirough 
itransiit)  the  womb  of  Mary. 

This  very  war  upon  the  favorite  shibboleth  of  orthodoxy 
provoked  the  bitterest  opposition  of  the  people  and  of  the 
monks,  whose  sympathies  were  with  the  Alexandrian  theology. 
They  contradicted  Kestorius  in  the  pulpit,  and  insulted  him 
on  the  street ;  while  he,  returning  evil  for  evil,  procured  corpo- 
ral punishments  and  imprisonment  for  the  monks,  and  con- 
demned the  view  of  his  antagonists  at  a  local  council  in  429.^ 

His  chief  antagonist  in  Constantinople  was  Proclus,  bishop 
of  Cyzicum,  perhaps  an  unsuccessful  rival  of  Nestorius  for  the 
patriarchate,  and  a  man  who  carried  the  worship  of  Mary  to 
an  excess  only  surpassed  by  a  modern  Roman  enthusiast  for 
the  dogma  of  the  immaculate  conception.     In  a  bombastic 

*  Cyril  charges  upon  Nestorius  (Epist.  ad  Cosiest.),  that  he  does  not  say  the  Son 
of  God  died  and  rose  again,  but  always  only  the  man  Jesus  died  and  rose.  Nestorius 
himself  says,  in  his  second  homily  (in  Mar.  Merc.  '763  sq.):  It  may  be  said  that  the 
Son  of  God,  in  the  loider  sense,  died,  but  not  that  God  died.  Moreover,  the  Scrip- 
tures, in  speaking  of  the  birth,  passion,  and  death,  never  say  God,  but  Christ,  or 
Jesus,  or  the  Lord, — all  of  them  names  which  suit  both  natures.  A  born,  dead, 
and  buried  God,  cannot  be  worshipped.  Pilate,  says  he  in  another  sermon,  did  not 
crucify  the  Godhead,  but  the  clothing  of  the  Godhead,  and  Joseph  of  Arimathea  did 
not  shroud  and  bury  the  Logos  (in  Marius  Merc.  789  sqq.). 

^  According  to  a  partisan  report  of  Basilius  to  the  emperor  Theodosius,  Nestorius 
struck,  with  his  own  hand,  a  presumptuous  monk  who  forbade  the  bishop,  as  an 
obstinate  heretic,  to  approach  the  altar,  and  then  made  him  over  to  the  officers,  who 
flogged  him  through  the  streets  and  then  cast  him  out  of  the  city. 


§   137.      THE   NESTOEIAJSr   CONTROVEESY.  721 

sermon  in  honor  of  the  Yirgin '  he  praised  her  as  "  the  spot- 
less treasure-house  of  virginity ;  the  spiritual  paradise  of  the 
second  Adam  ;  the  workshop,  in  which  the  two  natures  were 
annealed  together ;  the  Lridal  chamber  in  which  the  Word 
wedded  the  flesh ;  the  living  bush  of  nature,  which  was 
unharmed  by  the  fire  of  the  divine  birth  ;  the  light  cloud 
which  bore  him  who  sat  between  the  Clierubim ;  the  stainless 
fleece,  bathed  in  the  dews  of  Heaven,  with  which  the  Shep- 
herd clothed  his  sheep  ;  the  handmaid  and  the  mother,  the 
Virgin  and  Heaven." 

Soon  another  antagonist,  far  more  powerful,  arose  in  the 
person  of  the  patriarch  Cykil  of  Alexandria,  a  learned,  acute, 
energetic,  but  extremely  passionate,  haughty,  ambitious,  and 
disputatious  prelate.  Moved  by  interests  both  personal  and 
doctrinal,  he  entered  the  field,  and  used  every  means  to  over- 
throw his  rival  in  Constantinople,  as  his  like-minded  uncle  and 
predecessor,  Theophilus,  had  overthrown  the  noble  Chrysos- 
tom  in  the  Origenistic  strife.  The  theological  controversy  was 
at  the  same  time  a  contest  of  the  two  patriarchates.  In  per- 
sonal character  Cyril  stands  far  below  ll^estorius,  but  he  excell- 
ed him  in  knowledge  of  the  world,  shrewdness,  theologi- 
cal learning  and  acuteness,  and  had  the  show  of  greater  venera- 
tion for  Christ  and  for  Mary  on  his  side ;  and  in  his  opposition 
to  the  abstract  separation  of  the  divine  and  human  he  was  in 
the  right,  though  he  himself  pressed  to  the  verge  of  the  opposite 
error  of  mixing  or  confusing  the  two  natures  in  Christ."  In 
him  we  have  a  striking  proof  that  the  value  of  a  doctrine  cannot 
always  be  judged  by  the  personal  worth  of  its  representatives. 
God  uses  for  his  purposes  all  sorts  of  instruments,  good,  bad, 
and  indifi'erent. 

Cyril  first  wrote  to  Nestorius;  then  to  the  emperor,  the 
empress  Eudokia,  and  the  emperor's  sister  Pulcheria,  who 
took  lively  interest  in  church  affairs ;  finally  to  the  Koman 
bishop  Celestine ;  and  he  warned  bishops  and  churches  east 

'  See  Mansi,  torn.  iv.  518 ;  and  the  remarks  of  "Walch,  vol.  v.  373  S. 

'  Comp.  in  particular  his  assertion  of  a  evaxris  fvtriKri  in  the  third  of  his  Ana- 
thematismi  against  Nestorius;  Hefele  (ii.  155),  however,  understands  by  this  not  a 
evutris  eh  iiiav  (pvcrip,  but  only  a  real  union  in  one  being,  one  existence. 
VOL.  II. — 46 


722  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

and  west  against  the  dangerous  heresies  of  liis  rival.  Celcstine, 
moved  bj  orthodox  instinct,  flattered  by  the  appeal  to  his 
authority,  and  indignant  at  Nestorius  for  his  friendly  reception 
of  the  exiled  Pelagians,  condemned  his  doctrine  at  a  Roman 
council,  and  deposed  liim  from  the  patriarchal  chair,  unless 
he  should  retract  within  ten  days  (430). 

As  ISTestorius  persisted  in  his  view,  Cyril,  despising  the 
friendly  mediation  of  the  patriarch  John  of  Antioch,  hurled 
twelve  anathemas,  or  formulas  of  condemnation,  at  the  pa- 
triarch of  Constantinople  from  a  council  at  Alexandria  by 
order  of  the  pope  (430).' 

Nestorius  replied  with  twelve  counter-anathemas,  in  which 
he  accused  his  opponents  of  the  heresy  of  Apollinaris.'^  Theo- 
doret  of  Cyros,  the  learned  expositor  and  church  historian,  also 
wrote  against  Cyril  at  the  instance  of  John  of  Antioch. 

The  controversy  had  now  become  so  general  and  critical, 
that  it  could  be  settled  only  by  an  ecumenical  council. 

§  138.     T7ie  EcumeniGal  Council  of  Ephesus,  a.  d.  431.     The 

Compromise. 

For  tlie  Acts  of  the  Coimcil,  see  Mansi  (torn.  iv.  fol.  567-1482,  and  a  part 
of  torn,  v.),  Haeduin,  and  Fuchs,  and  an  extended  history  of  tlie  coun- 
cil and  the  transactions  connected  with  it  in  "Walch,  Scheockh,  and 
Hefele  (ii.  pp.  162-271).     "We  confine  ourselves  to  the  decisive  points. 

Theodosius  IL,  in  connection  with  his  Western  colleague, 
Yalentinian  III.,  summoned  a  universal  council  on  Pentecost, 
A.  D.  431,  at  Ephesus,  where  the  worship  of  the  Yirgin 
mother  of  God  had  taken  the  place  of  the  worship  of  the 
light  and  life  dispensing  virgin  Diana.  This  is  the  third  of 
the  ecumenical  councils,  and  is  held,  therefore,  by  all  churches, 
in  high  regard.  But  in  moral  character  this  council  stands  far 
beneath  that  of  Nicaea  or  of  the  first  council  of  Constantinople. 
An  uncharitable,  violent,  and  passionate  spirit  ruled  the  trans- 
actions.    The  doctrinal  result,  also,  was  mainly  only  negative ; 

'  Cyrilli  Opera,  torn.  iii.  67;  in  Mansi,  iv.  fol.  1067  sqq. ;  in  Gieseler,  i.  ii.  p.  143 
<S.  (§  88,  not.  20);  in  Hefele,  ii.  155  fiP. 

^  lu  llarius  Mercator,  p.  909  ;  Gieseler,  i.  ii.  1-15  f. ;  Hefele,  ii.  158  ff. 


§   138.      THE   ECUMElSnCAL   COrNCIL   OF   EPHESUS.  Y23 

that  is  to  say,  condemnation  of  Nestorianism.  The  positive 
and  ecumenical  character  of  the  council  was  really  secured 
only  by  the  subsequent  transactions,  and  the  union  of  the  dom- 
inant party  of  the  council  with  the  protesting  minority  of  Ori- 
ental bishops.' 

ISTestorius  came  first  to  Ephesus  with  sixteen  bishops,  and 
with  an  armed  escort,  as  if  he  were  going  into  battle.  He 
had  the  imperial  influence  on  his  side,  but  the  majority  of  the 
bishops  and  the  prevailing  voice  of  the  people  in  Ephesus,  and 
•  also  in  Constantinople,  were  against  him.  The  emperor  him- 
self could  not  be  present  in  person,  but  sent  the  captain  of  his 
body-guard,  the  comes  Candidian.  Cyril  appeared  with  a  nu- 
merous retinue  of  fifty  Egyptian  bishops,  besides  monks,  para- 
bolani,  slaves,  and  seamen,  under  the  banner  of  St.  Mark  and 
of  the  holy  Mother  of  God.     On  his  side  was  the  archbishop 

^  It  is  with  reference  to  this  council  mainly  that  Dean  Mihnan  (Latin  Christiani- 
ty, i.  221)  passes  the  following  harsh  and  sweeping  judgment  on  the  ecumenical 
councils  of  the  ancient  church :  "  Nowhere  is  Christianity  less  attractive,  and,  if  we 
look  to  the  ordinary  tone  and  character  of  the  proceedings,  less  authoritative,  than 
in  the  councOa  of  the  church.  It  is  in  general  a  fierce  coUision  of  two  rival  factions, 
neither  of  which  wiU  yield,  each  of  which  is  solemnly  pledged  against  conviction. 
Intrigue,  injustice,  violence,  decisions  on  authority  alone,  and  that  the  authority  of  a 
turbulent  majority,  decisions  by  wild  acclamation  rather  than  after  sober  inquiry, 
detract  from  the  reverence,  and  impugn  the  judgments,  at  least  of  the  later  councils. 
The  close  is  almost  invariably  a  terrible  anathema,  in  which  it  is  impossible  not  to 
discern  the  tones  of  human  hatred,  of  arrogant  triumph,  of  rejoicing  at  the  damna- 
tion imprecated  against  the  humihated  adversary.  Even  the  venerable  council  of 
Nicsea  commenced  with  mutual  accusals  and  recriminations,  which  were  suppressed 
by  the  moderation  of  the  emperor ;  and  throughout  the  account  of  Eusebius  there 
is  an  adulation  of  the  imperial  convert,  with  something  of  the  intoxication.  It  might 
be  of  pardonable  vanity,  at  finding  themselves  the  objects  of  royal  favor,  and  par- 
taking in  royal  banquets.  But  the  more  fatal  error  of  that  council  was  the  solicita- 
tion, at  least  the  acquiescence  in  the  infliction,  of  a  civil  penalty,  that  of  exile,  against 
the  recusant  prelates.  The  degeneracy  is  rapid  from  the  council  of  Nicaea  to  that 
of  Ephesus,  where  each  party  came  determined  to  use  every  means  of  haste,  manoeu- 
vre, court  influence,  bribery,  to  crush  his  adversary ;  where  there  was  an  encourage- 
ment of,  if  not  an  appeal  to,  the  violence  of  the  populace,  to  anticipate  the  decrees 
of  the  council ;  where  each  had  his  own  txunultuous  foreign  rabble  to  back  his  quar- 
rel; and  neither  would  scruple  at  any  means  to  obtain  the  ratification  of  their 
anathemas  through  persecution  by  the  civil  government."  This  is  but  the  dark  side 
of  the  picture.  In  spite  of  all  human  passions  and  imperfections  truth  triumphed  at 
last,  and  this  alone  accounts  for  the  extraordinary  effect  of  these  ecumenical  coun- 
cils, and  the  authority  they  still  enjoy  in  the  whole  Christian  world. 


724  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Memnon  of  Epliesns,  with  forty  of  liis  Asiatic  suffragans  and 
twelve  bishops  from  Pamphilia ;  and  the  clergy,  the  monks, 
and  the  people  of  Asia  Minor  were  of  the  same  sentiment. 
The  pope  of  Rome — for  the  first  time  at  an  ecumenical  coun- 
cil— was  represented  by  two  bishops  and  a  priest,  who  held 
with  Cyril,  but  did  not  mix  in  the  debates,  as  they  affected  to 
judge  between  the  contending  parties,  and  thus  maintain  the 
papal  authority.  This  deputation,  however,  did  not  come  in 
at  the  beginning.'  The  patriarch  John  of  Antioch,  a  friend  of 
]S'estorius,  was  detained  on  the  long  journey  with  his  bishops. 
Cyril  refused  to  wait,  and  opened  the  council  in  the  church 
of  St.  Mary  with  a  hundred  and  sixty  bishops  *  sixteen  days 
after  Pentecost,  on  the  22d  of  June,  in  spite  of  the  protest  of 
the  imperial  commissioner.  Nestorius  was  thrice  cited  to  ap- 
pear, but  refused  to  come  until  all  the  bishops  should  be  as- 
sembled. The  council  then  proceeded  without  him  to  the 
examination  of  the  point  in  dispute,  and  to  the  condemnation 
of  Kestorius.  The  bishops  unanimously  cried  :  "  Whosoever 
does  not  anathematize  ISTestorius,  let  himself  be  anathema ; 
the  true  faith  anathematizes  him ;  the  holy  council  anathema- 
tizes him.  Whosoever  holds  fellowship  with  Xestorius,  let 
him  be  anathema.  We  all  anathematize  the  letter  and  the 
doctrines  of  J^estorius.  We  all  anathematize  Nestorius 
and  his  followers,  and  his  ungodly  faith,  and  his  imgodly 
doctrine.  We  all  anathematize  !Nestorius,"  &c.'  Then  a 
multitude  of  Christological  expressions  of  the  earlier  fathers 
and  several  passages  from  the  writings  of  Kestorius  were 
read,  and  at  the  close  of  the  fii'st  session,  which  lasted 
till  late  in  the  night,  the  following  sentence  of  deposi- 
tion  was   adopted   and   subscribed  by   about   two    hundred 

'  St.  Auguatiae  also  was  oue  of  the  Western  bishops  who  were  summoned,  the 
emperor  having  sent  a  special  officer  to  him ;  but  he  had  died  shortly  before,  on  the 
28th  of  August,  430. 

"  Befqre  the  sentence  of  deposition  came  to  be  subscribed,  the  number  had  in- 
creased to  a  hundred  and  ninety-eight.  According  to  the  Roman  accounts  Cyril 
presided  in  the  name  and  under  the  commission  of  the  pope ;  but  in  this  case  he 
should  have  yielded  the  presidency  in  the  second  and  subsequent  sessions,  at  which 
the  papal  legates  were  present ;  which  he  did  not  do. 

^  In  ilansi,  tom.  iv.  p.  11 VO  sq. ;  Hefele,  ii.  169. 


§    138.      THE   ECUMENICAL    COUNCIL   OF   EPHESUS.  T25 

bishops :  "  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  is  blasphemed  by  him 
[N"estorius],  determines  through  this  holy  council  that  ISTesto- 
rius  be  excluded  from  the  episcopal  office,  and  from  all  sacer- 
dotal fellowship."  ' 

The  people  of  Ephesus  hailed  this  result  with  universal 
jubilee,  illuminated  the  city,  and  accompanied  Cyril  with 
torches  and  censers  in  state  to  his  house.* 

On  the  following  day  Nestorius  was  informed  of  the 
sentence  of  deposition  in  a  laconic  edict,  in  which  he  was 
called  a  new  Judas.  But  he  indignantly  protested  against 
the  decree,  and  made  complaint  in  an  epistle  to  the  emperor. 
The  imperial  commissioner  declared  the  decrees  invalid,  be- 
cause they  were  made  by  only  a  portion  of  the  council,  and 
he  prevented  as  far  as  possible  the  publication  of  them. 

A  few  days  after,  on  the  26th  or  27th  of  June,  John  of  An- 
tioch  at  last  reached  Ephesus,  and  immediately,  with  forty-two 
bishops  of  like  sentiment,  among  whom  was  the  celebrated 
Theodoret,  held  in  his  dwelling,  under  the  protection  of  the 
imperial  commissioner  and  a  body-guard,  a  counter  council  or 
conciliabulum,  yielding  nothing  to  the  haste  and  violence  of 
the  other,  deposed  Cyril  of  Alexandria  and  Memnon  of  Ephe- 
sus from  all  priestly  functions,  as  heretics  and  authors  of  the 
whole  disorder,  and  declared  the  other  bishops  who  voted  with 
them  excommunicate  until  they  should  anathematize  the 
heretical  propositions  of  Cyril.' 

!N"ow  followed  a  succession  of  mutual  criminations,  invec- 
tives, arts  of  church  diplomacy  and  politics,  intrigues,  and 
violence,  which  give  the  saddest  picture  of  the  uncharitable 
and  unspiritual  Christianity  of  that  time.  But  the  true  genius 
of  Christianity  is,  of  course,  far  elevated  above  its  unworthy 
organs,  and  overrules  even  the  worst  human  passions  for  the 
cause  of  truth  and  righteousness. 

O  fiXa(T(prifjLr]b€\s  roivvv  nap   outoO  Kupios  rjawv  'ItjctoOs  'K.piaThs  uipiae  5ta  T7}s 
xapouffTjs  dyii'TizTTjs  cruv(J5ov,  aWnrpiov  elvai.   rhv  aurhv   HiffTopiov  rod   iiricTKOTriKov 
a^icifj.aTos  Koi  iravrhi  (rvWoyuv  UpartKov.      Mansi,  iv.  fol.  1211  ;  Hefele,  ii.  172. 
/     'So  Cyril  himself  complacently  relates  in  a  letter  to  his  friends  in  Egypt.     See 
Mansi,  torn.  iv.  1241  sq. 

^  The  Acts  of  this  counter  council  in  Mansi,  torn.  iv.  1259  sqq.  (Acta  Concilia- 
bull).     Comp.  also  Ilefele,  ii.  ITS  S. 


726  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

On  the  lOtli  of  July,  after  tlie  arrival  of  the  papal  legates, 
who  bore  themselves  as  judges,  Cyril  held  a  second  session, 
and  then  five  more  sessions  (making  seven  in  all),  now  in  the 
house  of  JVIemnon,  now  in  St.  Mary's  church,  issuing  a  num- 
ber of  circular  letters  and  six  canons  against  the  E^estorians 
and  Pelagians. 

Both  parties  applied  to  the  weak  emperor,  who,  without 
understanding  the  question,  had  hitherto  leaned  to  the  side  of 
ISTestorius,  but  by  public  demonstrations  and  solemn  proces- 
sions of  the  people  and  monks  of  Constantinople  under  the 
direction  of  the  aged  and  venerated  Dalmatius,  was  awed  into 
the  worship  of  the  mother  of  God.  He  finally  resolved  to 
confirm  both-  the  deposition  of  Nestorius  and  that  of  Cyril  and 
Memnon,  and  sent  one  of  the  highest  civil  officers,  John,  to 
Ephesus,  to  publish  this  sentence,  and  if  possible  to  reconcile 
the  contending  parties.  The  deposed  bishops  were  arrested. 
The  council,  that  is  the  majority,  applied  again  to  the  emperor 
and  his  colleague,  deplored  their  lamentable  condition,  and 
desired  the  release  of  Cyril  and  Memnon,  who  had  never  been 
deposed  by  them,  but  on  the  contrary  had  always  been  held 
in  high  esteem  as  leaders  of  the  orthodox  doctrine.  TJie  An- 
tiochians  likewise  took  all  pains  to  gain  the  emperor  to  their 
side,  and  transmitted  to  him  a  creed  which  sharply  distin- 
guished, indeed,  the  two  natures  in  Christ,  yet,  for  the  sake  of 
the  unconfused  ujiioti  of  the  two  {aav<y)(VTO'i  eVojo-i?),  conce- 
ded to  Mary  the  disputed  predicate  theotokos. 

The  emperor  now  summoned  eight  spokesmen  from  each 
of  tlie  two  parties  to  himself  to  Chalcedon.  Among  them 
were,  on  the  one  side,  the  papal  deputies,  on  the  other  John 
of  Antioch  and  Theodoret  of  Cyros,  while  Cyril  and  Memnon 
were  obliged  to  remain  at  Ephesus  in  prison,  and  Nestorius  at 
his  own  wish  was  assigned  to  his  former  cloister  at  Antioch, 
and  on  the  25th  of  October,  431,  Maximian  was  nominated  as 
his  successor  in  Constantinople.  After  fruitless  deliberations, 
the  council  of  Ephesus  was  dissolved  in  October,  431,  Cyril 
and  Memnon  set  free,  and  the  bishops  of  both  parties  com- 
manded to  go  home. 

The  division  lasted  two  years  longer,  till  at  last  a  sort  of 


§138.      THE   ECUMENICAL   COUNCIL   OF   EPHESU8.  727 

compromise  was  effected.  John  of  Antioch  sent  the  aged 
bishop  Paul  of  Emfsa  a  messenger  to  Alexandria  with  a  creed 
which  he  had  already,  in  a  shorter  form,  laid  before  the  empe- 
ror, and  which  broke  the  doctrinal  antagonism  by  asserting 
the  duality  of  the  natures  against  Cyril,  and  the  predicate 
rrvother  of  God  against  ISTestorius.'  "  We  confess,"  says  this 
symbol,  which  was  composed  by  Theodoret,  "  that  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,  is  perfect  God 
and  perfect  man,  of  a  reasonable  soul  and  body  subsisting ;  ^ 
as  to  his  Godhead  begotten  of  the  Father  before  all  time,  but 
as  to  his  manhood,  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary  in  the  end  of  the 
days  for  us  and  for  our  salvation ;  of  the  same  essence  with  the 
Father  as  to  his  Godhead,  and  of  the  same  substance  with  us 
as  to  his  manhood ; '  for  two  natures  are  united  witli  one 
another.''  Therefore  we  confess  one  Christ,  one  Lord,  and  one 
Son.  By  reason  of  this  union,  which  yet  is  without  confusion,^ 
we  also  confess  that  the  holy  Virgin  is  mother  of  God,  because 
God  the  Logos  was  made  flesh  and  man,  and  united  with  him- 
self the  temple  [humanity]  even  from  the  conception  ;  which 
temple  he  took  from  the  Yii'gin.  But  concerning  the  words 
of  the  Gospel  and  Epistles  respecting  Christ,  we  know  that 
theologians  apply  some  which  refer  to  the  one  person  to  the 
two  natures  in  common,  but  separate  others  as  referring  to  the 
two  natures,  and  assign  tlie  expressions  which  become  God  to 
the  Godhead  of  Christ,  but  the  expressions  of  humiliation  to 
his  manhood."  * 

'  la  Mansi,  torn.  v.  fol.  305;  Hefele,  ii.  246;  and  Gieseler,  i.  ii.  p.  150. 

"  Geoj'  riXfiov  kcu  &vbpanTov  rihuov  iK  4'^x'i^  XoytKris  (against  Apollinaris)  koI 
(rwfx.aTos. 

^  'Ofioovatov  T^  TTOTpl  Kara  ttjv  d^eorrjTo,  Kal  6iJ.oovai.ov  rjtj.1v  Kara  t^v  av^pcinro- 
TjjTa.  Here  ho/iioouslos,  at  least  in  the  second  clause^  evidently  does  not  imply 
numerical  unity,  but  only  generic  unity. 

*  Alio  yap  cpv<Te(i:v  evwcris  yiyove,  in  opposition  to  the  fj-la  (pvcns  of  CyriL 

*  Kara  ravTTjv  TTjv  rris  aavyx'^T  ov  (against  Cyril)  evdcrews  tvvoiav. 

Kai  Tos  fjiv  i&eoTrpeTreTj  koto  ttjv  ^i6Tr]Ta  rod  Xpiarov,  tos  Se  TOTreico?  /coxa 
rijv  avS)puiT6r  TIT  a  avrov  -KapaBiSovras.  Gieseler  says  (i.  ii.  p.  152),  Xestoriua  never 
asserted  anythmg  but  what  agrees  with  tiiis  confession  which  Cyril  subscribed.  But 
he  pressed  the  distinction  of  the  natures  in  Christ  so  far  that  it  amounted,  in  sub- 
stance, though  not  in  expression,  to  two  persons ;  he  taught  not  a  true  becoming 
man,  but  the  anion  of  the  Logos  with  a  reAejos  iv^oanros,  a  hmnan  person  there- 


728  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Cyril  assented  to  this  confession,  and  repeated  it  Terbally, 
with  some  further  doctrinal  explanations,  in  his  answer  to  the 
irenical  letter  of  the  patriarch  of  Antioch,  but  insisted  on  the 
condemnation  and  deposition  of  Kestorius  as  the  indispensa- 
ble condition  of  church  fellowship.  At  the  same  time  he 
knew  how  to  gain  the  imperial  court  to  the  orthodox  side  by 
all  kinds  of  presents,  which,  according  to  the  Oriental  custom 
of  testifying  submission  to  princes  by  presents,  were  not  neces- 
sarily regarded  as  bribes.  Tlie  Antiochians,  satisfied  with 
saving  the  doctrine  of  two  natures,  thought  it  best  to  sacrifice 
the  person  of  Nestorius  to  the  unity  of  the  church,  and  to  ana- 
thematize his  "  wicked  and  unholy  innovations."  ^  Thus  in 
433  union  was  effected,  though  not  without  much  contradiction 
on  both  sides,  nor  without  acts  of  imperial  force. 

The  unhappy  Nestorius  was  dragged  from  the  stillness  of 
his  former  cloister,  the  cloister  of  Euprepius  before  the  gates 
of  Antioch,  in  which  he  had  enjoyed  four  years  of  repose, 
from  one  place  of  exile  to  another,  first  to  Arabia,  then  to 
Egypt,  and  was  compelled  to  drink  to  the  dregs  the  bitter  cup 
of  persecution  which  he  himself,  in  the  days  of  his  power,  had 
forced  npon  the  heretics.  He  endured  his  suffering  with 
resignation  and  independence,  wrote  his  life  under  the  signifi- 
cant title  of  Tragedy,^  and  died  after  439,  no  one  knows  where 
nor  when.  Characteristic  of  the  fanaticism  of  the  times  is 
the  statement  quoted  by  Evagrius,^  that  Nestorius,  after  hav- 
ing his  tongue  gnawed  by  worms  in  punishment  for  his  blas- 
phemy, passed  to  the  harder  torments  of  eternity.  The  Mo- 
nophysite  Jacobites  are  accustomed  from  year  to  year  to  cast 


fore  not  nature ;  and  he  constantly  denied  the  theotokos,  except  in  an  improper 
sense.  His  doctrine  was  unquestionably  much  distorted  by  his  cotemporaries ;  but 
so  also  was  the  doctrine  of  Cyril. 

^  Tas  (pav\as  avTov  kcu  ^f^i)Xovs  K.aivo<pb>vias. 

^  Fragments  in  Evagrius,  H.  E.  i.  7,  and  in  the  Synodicon  adversus  Tragoediam 
Irenaei,  c.  6.  That  the  book  bore  the  name  of  Tragedy,  is  stated  by  Ebedjesu,  a 
Xestorian  metropoUtan.  The  imperial  commissioner,  Irenteus,  afterwards  bishop  of 
Tyre,  a  friend  of  Xestorius,  composed  a  book  concerning  him  and  the  ecclesiastical 
history  of  his  time,  likewise  under  the  title  of  Tragedy,  fragments  of  which,  in  a 
Latin  translation,  are  preserved  in  the  so-called  Synodicon,  in  Mansi,  v.  731  sqq. 

«  Hist.  Eccl.  i.  6. 


§   139.      THE   NESTOEIAJStS.  729 

stones  upon  his  supposed  grave  in  Uj)per  Egypt,  and  have  spread 
the  tradition  that  it  has  never  been  moistened  by  the  rain  of 
heaven,  which  yet  falls  upon  the  evil  and  the  good.  The 
emperor,  who  had  formerly  favored  him,  but  was  now  turned 
entirely  against  him,  caused  all  his  writings  to  be  burned,  and 
his  followers  to  be  named  after  Simon  Magus,  and  stigmatized 
as  Simonians.* 

The  same  orthodox  zeal  turned  also  upon  the  writings  of 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  the  long  deceased  teacher  of  ISTestorius 
and  father  of  his  error.  Bishop  Eabulas  of  Edessa  (1435) 
pronounced  the  anathema  upon  him  and  interdicted  his  wri- 
tings ;  and  though  his  successor  Ibas  (436-457)  again  interested 
himself  in  Theodore,  and  translated  several  of  his  writings  into 
Syriac  (the  ecclesiastical  tongue  of  the  Persian  church),  yet 
the  persecution  soon  broke  out  afresh,  and  the  theological 
school  of  Edessa  where  the  Antiochian  theology  had  longest 
maintained  its  life,  and  whence  the  Persian  clergy  had  proceed- 
ed, was  dissolved  by  the  emperor  Zeno  in  489.  This  was  the 
end  of  Nestorianism  in  the  Roman  empire. 

§  139.     The  Nestorians. 

Jos.  Sim.  AssemanI  :  De  Syris  Nestorianis,  in  liis  Bibliotheca  Orientalis. 
Rom.  1719-1728,  fol.  torn.  iii.  P.  ii.  Ebedjesd  (Nestorian  metro- 
politan of  Nisibis,  1 1318) :  Liber  Margarit89  de  veritate  fidei  (a  defence 

'  For  bis  sad  fate  and  his  upright  character  Nestorius,  after  having  been  long 
abhorred,  has  in  modem  times,  since  Luther,  found  much  sympathy ;  while  Cyril  by 
his  violent  conduct  has  incurred  mucfi  censure.  "Walch,  1.  c.  v.  p.  817  if.,  has  col- 
lected the  earlier  opinions.  Gieseler  and  Neander  take  the  part  of  Nestorius  against 
Cyril,  and  think  that  he  was  unjustly  condemned.  So  also  Milman,  who  would 
rather  meet  the  judgment  of  the  Divine  Redeemer  loaded  with  the  errors  of  Nesto- 
rius than  with  the  barbarities  of  C}Til,  but  does  not  enter  into  the  theological  merits 
of  the  controversy.  (History  of  Latin  Christianity,  i.  210.)  Petavius,  Baur,  Hefele, 
and  Ebrard,  on  the  contrary,  vindicate  Cyril  against  Nestorius,  not  as  to  his  personal 
conduct,  which  was  anything  but  Christian,  but  in  regard  to  the  particular  matter  in 
question,  viz.,  the  defence  of  the  unity  of  Christ  against  the  division  of  his  personal- 
ity. Dorner  (ii.  81  IF.)  justly  distributes  right  and  wrong,  truth  and  error,  on  both 
sides,  and  considers  Nestorius  and  Cyril  representatives  of  two  equally  one-sided 
conceptions,  which  complement  each  other.  Cyril's  strength  lay  on  the  religious 
and  speculative  side  of  Christolog}',  that  of  Nestorius  on  the  ethical  and  practical, 
Kahnis  gives  a  similar  judgment,  Dogmatik,  ii.  p.  86. 


730  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

of  Nestorianism),  in  Ang.  Maps  Scrip,  vet.  nova  collect,  x.  ii.  317. 
Gibbon  :  Chap,  slvii.,  near  the  end.  E.  Smith  and  H.  Gr.  0.  Dwight  : 
Eesearches  in  Armenia ;  with  a  visit  to  the  Nestorian  and  Chaldean 
Christians  of  Oormiah  and  Salmas.  2  vols.  Bost.  1833.  Justin 
Perkins:  A  Residence  of  eight  years  in  Persia.  Andover,  1843. 
WiLTSon :  Kirchliche  Geographie  u.  Statistik.  Berl.  1846,  i.  214  ff.^ 
Geo.  Peect  Badger:  The  Nestorians  and  their  Rituals.  Illustrated 
(with  colored  plates),  2  vols.  Lond.  1852.  H.  Newcomb  :  A  Cyclo- 
paedia of  Missions.  New  York,  1856,  p.  553  ff.  Petermann:  Article 
Nestorianer,  in  Herzog's  Theol.  Encykl.  vol.  x.  (1858),  pp.  279-288. 

While  most  of  the  heresies  of  antiquity,  Arianism  not  ex- 
cepted, have  been  utterly  obliterated  from  history,  and  only 
raise  their  heads  from  time  to  time  as  individual  ojpinions  un- 
der peculiar  modifications,  the  Christological  heresies  of  the 
fifth  century,  Nestorianism  and  Monophysitism,  continue  in 
organized  sects  to  this  day.  These  schismatic  churches  of  the 
East  are  the  petrified  remains  or  ruins  of  important  chajDters 
in  the  history  of  the  ancient  church.  They  are  sunk  in  igno- 
rance and  superstition ;  but  they  are  more  accessible  to  West- 
ern Christianity  than  the  orthodox  Greek  church,  and  ofier  to 
the  Roman  and  Protestant  churches  an  interesting  field  of 
missions,  especially  among  the  Nestorians  and  the  Armenians. 

The  Nestorians  differ  from  the  orthodox  Greek  church  in 
their  repudiation  of  the  council  of  Ephesus  and  of  the  wor- 
ship of  Mary  as  mother  of  God,  of  the  use  of  images  (though 
they  retain  the  sign  of  the  cross),  of  the  doctrine  of  purgatory 
(though  they  have  prayers  for  the  dead),  and  of  transubstan- 
tiation  (though  they  hold  the  real  presence  of  Christ  in  the 
eucharist),  as  well  as  in  greater  simplicity  of  worship.  They 
are  subject  to  a  peculiar  hierarchical  organization  with  eight 
orders,  from  the  catholieus  or  patriarch  to  the  sub-deacon  and 
reader.  The  five  lower  orders,  up  to  the  priests,  may  marry ; 
in  former  times  even  the  bishops,  archbishops,  and  patriarchs 
had  this  privilege.  Their  fasts  are  numerous  and  strict.  The 
feast-days  begin  with  sunset,  as  among  the  Jews.  The  patri- 
arch eats  no  flesh  ;  he  is  chosen  always  from  the  same  fami- 
ly ;  he  is  ordained  by  three  metropolitans.  Most  of  the  eccle- 
siastical books  are  written  in  the  Syriac  language. 

After   Nestorianism   was  exterminated  from  the  Roman 


I 


,  y7i.z««.^;;^77^  "^52  -^--  ''^'^^  ^^- 


§   139.      THE   NEST0EIAN8.  731 

empii'c,  it  found  an  asylum  in  the  kingdom  of  Persia,  whitlier 
several  teachers  of  the  theological  school  of  Edessa  fled.  One 
of  them,  Barsumas,  became  bishop  of  Nisibis  (435-489),' 
founded  a  new  theological  seminary  there,  and  confirmed  the 
Persian  Christians  in  their  aversion  to  the  Cyrillian  council  of 
Ephesus,  and  in  their  adhesion  to  the  Antiochian  and  Nestorian 
theology.  They  were  favored  by  the  Persian  kings,  from  Pherozes, 
or  Firuz,  onward  (461-488),  out  of  political  opposition  to  Con- 
stantinople. At  the  council  of  Scleucia  (498)  they  renounced 
all  connection  with  the  orthodox  church  of  the  empire.     They 

5  called  themselves,  after  their  liturgical  language,  Chaldean  or  jp 
^/Ctkian  Christians,  while  they  were  called  by  their  oppo-  'j 
^  nents  Kestorians.  They  had  a  patriarch,  who  after  the  year 
496  resided  in  the  double  city  of  Seleucia-Ctesiphon,  and  after 
762  in  Bagdad  (the  capital  of  the  Saracenic  empire),  under  the 
name  of  Yazelich  (catholicus),  and  who,  in  the  thui;eenth 
century,  had  no  less  than  twenty-five  metro^Dolitans  under  his 
supervision. 

The  Kestorian  church  flourished  for  several  centuries, 
spread  from  Persia,  with  great  missionary  zeal,  to  India, 
Arabia,  and  even  to  China  and  Tartary,  and  did  good  service 
in  scholarship  and  in  the  founding  of  schools  and  hospitals. 
Mohammed  is  supposed  to  owe  his  imperfect  knowledge  of 
Christianity  to  a  Kestorian  monk,  Sergius ;  and  from  him  the 
sect  received  many  privileges,  so  that  it  obtained  great  consid- 
eration among  the  Arabians,  and  exerted  an  influence  upon 
their  culture,  and  thus  upon  the  development  of  philosophy 
and  science  in  general.'^ 

'  Not  to  be  confounded  with  the  contemporary  Monophysite  ahhot  Barsumas,  a 
saint  of  the  Jacobites. 

^  The  observations  of  Alex,  von  Humboldt,  in  the  2d  vol.  of  his  Kosmos  (Stuttg. 
and  Tiib.  1847,  p.  247  f ),  on  the  connection  of  Xestorianism  with  the  culture  and 
physical  science  of  the  Arabians,  are  worthy  of  note:  "It  was  one  of  the  wondrous 
arrangements  in  the  system  of  things,  that  the  Christian  sect  of  the  Xestorians, 
which  has  exerted  a  very  important  influence  on  the  geographical  extension  of 
knowledge,  was  of  service  even  to  the  Arabians  before  the  latter  found  their  way  to 
learned  and  disputatious  Alexandria ;  that  Christian  Xestorianism,  in  fact,  under  the 
protection  of  the  arms  of  Islam,  was  able  to  penetrate  far  into  Eastern  Asia.  The 
Arabians,  in  other  words,  gained  their  first  acquaintance  with  Grecian  literature 
.  through  the  Sjrrians,  a  kindred  Semitic  race ;  while  the  Syrians  themselves,  scarcely 


^ 


732  THIRD  PEEIOD.   A.D.    311-590. 

Among  tlie  Tartars,  in  tlie  eleventh  century,  it  succeeded 
in  converting  to  Christianity  a  king,  the  priest-king  Presbyter 
John  (Prester  John)  of  the  Kerait,  and  his  successor  of  the  same 
name.'  But  of  this  we  have  only  uncertain  accounts,  and  at 
all  events  Il^estorian  Christianity  has  since  left  but  slight  traces 
in  Tartary  and  in  China. 

Under  the  Mongol  dynasty  the  Kestorians  were  cruelly 
persecuted.  The  terrible  Tamerlane,  the  scourge  and  the 
destroyer  of  Asia,  towards  the  end  of  the  fourteenth  century 
almost  exterminated  them.  Yet  they  have  maintained  them- 
selves on  the  wild  mountains  and  in  the  valleys  of  Kurdistan 
and  in  Armenia  under  the  Turkish  dominion  to  this  day,  with 
a  separate  patriarch,  who  from  1559  till  the  seventeenth 
century  resided  at  Mosul,  but  has  since  dwelt  in  an  almost 

a  century  and  a  half  before,  had  first  received  the  knowledge  of  Grecian  literature 
through  the  anathematized  Nestorians.  Physicians  who  had  been  educated  in  the 
institutions  of  the  Greeks,  and  at  the  celebrated  medical  school  founded  by  the 
Nestorian  Christians  at  Edessa  in  Mesopotamia,  were,  so  early  as  the  times  of  Mo- 
hammed, Uving,  befriended  by  him  and  by  Abu-Bekr,  in  Mecca. 

"  The  school  of  Edessa,  a  model  of  the  Benedictine  schools  of  Monte  Casino  and 
Salerno,  awakened  the  scientific  search  for  materia  medica  in  the  mineral  and  vege- 
table kingdoms.  When  it  was  dissolved  by  Christian  fanaticism  under  Zeno  the 
Isaurian,  the  Nestorians  scattered  towards  Persia,  where  they  soon  attained  poUtical 
importance,  and  established  a  new  and  thronged  medical  institute  at  Dschondisapur 
in  Khuzistan.  They  succeeded  in  spreading  their  science  and  their  faith  to  China 
towards  the  middle  of  the  seventh  century  under  the  dynasty  of  Thang,  five  hun- 
dred and  seventy-two  years  after  Buddhism  had  penetrated  thither  from  India. 

"  The  seed  of  Western  culture,  scattered  in  Persia  by  educated  monks,  and  by 
the  philosophers  of  the  last  Platonic  school  of  Athens  who  were  persecuted  by  Jus- 
tinian, took  beneficent  root  among  the  Arabians  during  their  first  Asiatic  campaign. 
Feeble  as  the  science  of  the  Nestorian  priests  may  have  been,  it  could  still,  with  its 
peculiar  medical  and  pharmaceutic  turn,  act  genially  upon  a  race  which  had  long 
lived  in  free  converse  with  nature,  and  had  preserved  a  more  fresh  sensibility  to 
every  sort  of  study  of  nature,  than  the  people  of  Greek  and  Italian  cities.  What 
gives  the  Arabian  epoch  the  universal  importance  which  we  must  here  insist  upon, 
is  in  great  part  connected  with  the  trait  of  national  character  just  indicated.  The 
Arabians,  we  repeat,  are  to  be  regarded  as  the  proper  founders  of  the  physical 
sciences,  in  the  sense  which  we  are  now  accustomed  to  attach  to  the  word." 

'  On  this  fabulous  priest-kingdom,  which  the  popes  endeavored  by  unsuccessful 
embassies  to  unite  to  the  Roman  church,  and  whose  light  was  quenched  by  the  tide 
of  the  conquests  of  Zengis  Khan,  comp.  Mosheim:  Historia  Tartarorum  ecclcs. 
Uelmst.  1*741 ;  Neander  :  Kirchengesch.  vol.  v.  p.  84  ff.  (9th  part  of  the  whole  work, 
cd.  1841);,swffl  Ritpr:  Erdkunde,  part  ii.  vol.  i.  pp.  256,  283  (2d  ed.  1832).  ,^,V 


-rcn^gt^ 


Jl^..^^^  crm^^.  ^^^^^'Mi  ^^^^-^^  -fvf 


§   139.      THE  NESTOEIANS.  733 

inaccessible'  valley   on  the  borders  of   Turkey   and   Persia. 
They  are  very  ignorant  and  poor,  and  have  been  much  rcdnccd 

A  portion  of  the  Nestorians,  especially  those  in   cities,  <j:^»^  j^,  ^;. 
united  fi'om  time  to  time,  nnder  the  name  of  Chaldasans,  with    %^iL.i;'£M^  ^  1 
the  Eoman  church,  and  have   a  patriarch  of  their  own  at     M^  <wJ/  * 
Bagdad.  _  '^^ 

And  on  the  other  side,  Protestant  missionaries  from  Amer- 
ica have  made  vigorous  and  successful  efforts,  since  1S33,  to 
evangelize  and  civilize  the  Nestorians  by  preaching,  schools, 
translations  of  the  Bible,  and  good  boohs.' 

The  Thoiias-Christiaks  in  East  India  are  a  branch  of  the 
Nestorians,  named  from  the  apostle  Thomas,  who  is  supposed 
to  have  preached  the  gospel  on  the  coast  of  Malabar.  They 
honor  the  memory  of  Theodore  and  l!^estorius  in  their  Syriac 
liturgy,  and  adhere  to  the  I^estorian  patriarchs.  In  the  six- 
teenth century  they  were,  with  reluctance,  connected  with  the 
Roman  church  for  sixty  years  (1599-1663)  through  the  agency 
of  Jesuit  missionaries.  But  when  the  Portuguese  power  in 
India  was  shaken  by  the  Dutch,  they  returned  to  their  inde- 
pendent position,  and  since  the  expulsion  of  the  Portuguese 
they  have  enjoyed  the  free  exercise  of  their  religion  on  tlie 
coast  of  Malabar,  The  number  of  the  Thomas-Christians  is 
said  still  to  amount  to  seventy  thousand  souls,  who  form  a 
province  by  themselves  under  the  British  empire,  governed  by  ^  Ajp  Qi 
priests  and  elders.  ^-^  ^jT  <fi'  O^w^iC 

f — 

*  Dr.  Justin  Perkins,  Asahel  Grant,  Rhea,  Stoddard,  Wrigbt,  'and  other  missiona- 
ries of  the  American  Board  of  Commissioners  for  Foreign  Missions.  The  centre  of  ft 
their  labors  is  <^^^miah,  a  city  of  23,000  inhabitants,  of  Avhom  1,000  are  Xestorians.  L^'T  C^ 
Comp.  on  this  subject  Newcomb,  1.  c.  556  ff.,  especially  the  letter  of  Dr.  Perkins  of 
1854,  p.  564  ff.,  on  the  present  condition  of  this  mission;  also  Joseph  P.  Thompson: 
Memoir  of  the  Rev.  David  Tappan  Stoddard,  missionary  to  the  Nestorians,  Boston, 
1858 ;  and  a  pamphlet  issued  by  the  American  B.  C.  F.  M. :  Historical  Sketch  of  the 
Mission  to  the  Nestorians  by  Justin  Perkins,  and  of  the  Assyrian  Mission  by  Rev. 
Thomas  Laurie,  New  York,  1862.  The  American  Board  of  Foreign  Missions  look 
upon  the  Nestorian  and  Armenian  missions  as  a  means  and  encouraging  pledge  of 
the  conversion  of  the  millions  of  Mohammedans,  among  whom  Providence  has  placed 
and  preserved  those  ancient  sects,  as  it  would  seem,  for  such  an  end. 


734:  THIRD  PERIOD.   A.D.   311-590. 


§  140.    The  Eutychian  Controversy.    The  Council  of  Boilers^ 

A.  D.  449. 

Comp.  the  Works  at  §  137. 
SOURCES. 

AoTS  of  the  council  of  Chalcedon,  of  the  local  council  of  Constantinople, 
and  of  the  Eobber  Synod  of  Ephesus.  The  correspondence  between 
Leo  and  Flavian,  etc.  For  these  acts,  letters,  and  other  documents, 
see  Mansi,  Cone.  torn.  v.  vi.  and  vii.  (Gelasitjs  ?) :  Breviculus  historise 
Eutychianistarum  s.  gesta  de  nomine  Acacii  (extending  to  486,  in 
Mansi,  vii.  1060  sqq.).  Libekatus  :  Breviarium  causaa  Nest,  et  Eutych. 
Leontius  Btzant.  :  Contra  Nest,  et  Eutych.  The  last  part  of  the 
Synodicon  adv.  tragoediam  Irensei  (in  Mansi,  v.  Y31  sqq.).  Evageitts  : 
H.  E.  i.  9  sqq.  Theodoeet:  'Epaviarrjs  (the  Beggar)  or  IloXv/iop^op 
(the  Multiformed), — a  refutation  of  the  Egyptian  Eutychian  system  of 
doctrines  (which  begged  together  so  much  from  various  old  heresies, 
as  to  form  a  new  one),  in  three  dialogues,  written  in  447  (Opera,  ed. 
Schulze,  vol.  iv.). 

LITERATURE. 

Petavitjs:  De  incarnatione  Verbi,  lib.  i.  c.  14-18,  and  the  succeeding 
books,  particularly  iii.,  iv.,  and  v,  (Theolog.  dogmatum,  torn.  iv.  p.  65 
sqq.  ed.  Par.  1650).  Tillemont:  Memoires,  tom.  xv.  pp.  479-719. 
C.  A.  Salig:  De  Eutychianismo  ante  Eutychen.  "Wolfenb.  1723. 
"Waloh:  Ketzerhist.  vol.  vi.  3-640.  ScnEOCKn:  vol.  xviii.  433-492. 
Neandee  :  Kirchengesch.  iv.  pp.  942-992.  Baue  :  Gesch.  der  Lehre 
von  d.  Dreieinigkeit,  etc.  i.  800-825.  Doenee  :  Gesch.  d.  Lehre  v.  d. 
Pers.  Chr.  ii.  99-149.  Hefele  (R.  C.)  :  Conciliengesch.  ii.  pp.  295- 
545.  "W.  Cunningham:  Historical  Theology,  i.  pp.  311-'15.  Comp. 
also  the  Monographs  of  Aeendt  (1835)  and  Peethel  (1843)  on  Leo  L 

The  result  of  the  third  universal  council  was  rather  nega- 
tive than  positive.  The  council  condemned  the  ISTestorian 
error,  without  fixing  the  true  doctrine.  The  subsequent  union 
of  the  Alexandrians  and  the  Antiochians  was  only  a  superficial 
peace,  to  which  each  party  had  sacrificed  somewhat  of  its  con- 
victions. Compromises  are  generally  of  short  duration  ;  prin- 
ciples and  systems  must  develope  themselves  to  their  utmost 
consequences  ;  heresies  must  ripen,  and  must  be  opened  to  the 
core.  As  the  Antiochian  theology  begot  ISTestorianism,  which 
stretched  the  distinction  of  the  human  and  divine  natures  in 


§  140.     THE  eutychia:^  conteoveksy;  735 

Christ  to  double  personality ;  so  tlie  Alexandrian  theology 
begot  the"-  opposite  error  of  Eutychianism  or  Monophysitism, 
which  urged  the  personal  unity  of  Christ  at  the  expense  of 
the  distinction  of  natures,  and  made  the  divine  Logos  absorb 
the  human  nature.  The  latter  error  is  as  dangerous  as  the  for- 
mer. For  if  Christ  is  not  true  man,  he  cannot  be  our  exam- 
ple, and  his  passion  and  death  dissolve  at  last  into  mere  figura- 
tive representations  or  docetistic  show. 

A  large  portion  of  the  party  of  Cyril  was  dissatisfied  with 
the  union  creed,  and  he  was  obliged  to  purge  himself  of  incon- 
sistency. He  referred  the  duality  of  natures  spoken  of  in  the 
symbol  to  the  abstract  distinction  of  deity  and  humanity, 
while  the  two  are  so  made  one  in  the  one  Christ,  that  after  the 
union  all  separation  ceases,  and  only  one  nature  is  to  be  recog- 
nized in  the  incarnate  Son.  The  Logos,  as  the  proper  subject 
of  the  one  nature,  has  indeed  all  human,  or  rather  divine-hu- 
man, attributes,  but  without  a  human  nature.  Cyril's  theory 
of  the  incarnation  approaches  Patripassianism,  but  difi'ers 
from  it  in  making  the  Son  a  distinct  hypostasis  from  the 
Father.  It  mixes  the  divine  and  human  ;  but  it  mixes  them 
only  in  Christ,  and  so  is  Christo-theistic,  but  not  pantheistic.^ 

On  the  other  side,  the  Orientals  or  Antiochians,  under  the 
lead  of  John,  Ibas,  and  especially  Theodoret,  interpreted  the 
union  symbol  in  their  sense  of  a  distinction  of  the  two 
natures  continuing  in  the  one  Chiist  even  after  the  incarna- 
tion, and  actually  obtained  the  victory  for  this  moderate  Kes- 
torianism,  by  the  help  of  the  bishop  of  Rome,  at  the  council 
of  Chalcedon. 

'  Cyril's  true  view  is  most  clearly  expressed  in  the  following  propositions  (comp. 
Mansi,  v.  320,  and  Niedner,  p.  364):  The  ivaapKuan  was  a  cpvcriKr]  evuais,  or  be- 
coming man,  on  the  part  of  God,  so  that  there  is  only  fxla  <reaapKi:fj.evr}  <pv<Tis  tov 
\oyov,  'O  Qehs  \6yos,  fvai^fls  cropfcl  /fo^'  inrScrTairiv,  iyevero  &v^ pw  ttos ,  ou 
ffvvri(p^  avbpdiTTU).  Mia  ^5t)  voilTai  (pvais  ixera  rrju  ivaiaiv,  t)  uvtov  tov  \6you 
(TicapKUfxiVT],  'H  rov  Kvpiov  (Tapl  iOTLV  I5ia  TOV  Qeov  \6yov,  ovx  erepov  Tivhs  Trap* 
avrov.  The  eVojcriT  tS>v  (pvaewv  is  not,  indeed,  exactly  a  (rvyxvcii  twv  (pvanjiVy  but 
at  all  events  excludes  all  Sioipetris,  and  demands  an  absolute  co-existence  and  inter- 
penetration  of  the  \6yos  and  the  aip^.  The  consequence  of  this  incarnation  is  the 
existence  of  a  new  entity,  a  divine-human  subject,  which  is  in  notlung  only  God  or 
ordy  man,  but  in  everything  is  both  in  one,  and  whose  attributes  (proprietates,  idio- 
mata)  are  not,  some  divine  and  others  human,  but  all  divine-human- 


736  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

The  new  controversy  was  opened  by  the  party  of  mono- 
physite  sentiment.  ♦ 

Cyril  died  in  444.  His  arch-deacon,  Dioscm-us  {ALoa-Kopo^)^ 
who  had  accompanied  him  to  the  council  at  Ephesus,  succeeded 
him  in  the  patriarchal  chair  of  Alexandria  (444-451),  and 
surpassed  him  in  all  his  bad  qualities,  while  he  fell  far  behind 
him  in  intellect  and  in  theological  capacity.*  He  was  a  man 
of  unbounded  ambition  and  stormy  passion,  and  shrank  from 
no  measures  to  accomplish  his  designs  and  to  advance  the 
Alexandi'ian  see  to  the  supremacy  of  the  entire  East ;  in  which 
he  soon  succeeded  at  the  Council  of  Robbers,.  He  put  himself 
at  the  head  of  the  monoj^hysite  party,  and  everywhere  stirred 
the  fire  of  a  war  against  the  Antiochian  Christology. 

The  theological  representative,  but  by  no  means  the  au- 
thor, of  the  monophysite  heresy  which  bears  his  name,  was 
EuTTCHES,''  an  aged  and  respected,  but  not  otherwise  impor- 
tant presbyter  and  archimandrite  (head  of  a  cloister  of  three 
hundred  monks)  in  Constantinople,  who  had  lived  many 
years  in  monastic  seclusion,  and  had  only  once  appeared  in 
public,  to  raise  his  voice,  in  that  procession,  for  the  CyrilKan 
council  of  Ephesus  and  against  I^estorius,  His  relation  to  the 
Alexandrian  Christology  is  like  that  of  I^estorius  to  the  Anti- 
ochian ;  that  is,  he  drew  it  to  a  head,  brought  it  to  popular 
expression,  and  adhered  obstinately  to  it ;  but  he  is  considera- 
bly inferior  to  Xestorius  in  talent  and  learning.  His  connec- 
tion with  this  controversy  is  in  a  great  measure  accidental. 

Eutyches,  like  Cyril,  laid  chief  stress  on  the  divine  in 
Christ,  and  denied  that  two  natures  could  be  spoken  of  after 
the  incarnation.     In  our  Lord,  after  his  birth,  he  worshipped 

^  Towards  the  memory  of  Cyril  he  behaved  very  recklessly.  He  confiscated  his 
considerable  estate  (Cyril  was  of  wealthy  family),  accused  him  of  squandering  the 
church  funds  in  his  war  against  Nestorius,  and  unseated  several  of  his  relatives.  Ho 
was  himself  charged,  at  the  council  of  Chalcedon,  with  embezzlement  of  the  moneys 
of  the  church  and  of  the  poor. 

^  That  is,  the  Fortunate.  His  opponents  said  he  should  rather  have  been  named 
Ati/ches,  the  Unfortunate.  He  must  not  be  confounded  with  the  deacon  Eutyches, 
who  attended  Cyril  to  the  council  of  Ephesus.  Leo  the  Great,  in  his  renowned  letter 
to  Flavian,  calls  him  "  very  ignorant  and  unskilled,"  multum  imprudens  et  nimia 
im'peritus,  and  justly  attributes  his  error  rather  to  imperitia  than  to  versutia.  So 
also  Petavius  and  Hefele  (ii.  p.  300). 


% 


§  140.   THE  EUTTCHIAN  CONTKOVEEST.         737 

only  one  natui'e,  the  nature  of  God  become  flesh  and  man.* 
The  impersonal  human  nature  is  assimilated  and,  as  it  were, 
deified  by  the  personal  Logos,  so  that  his  body  is  by  no  means 
of  the  same  substance  {o/jLoovctlov)  with  ours,  but  a  divine 
body.'  All  human  attributes  are  transferred  to  the  one  sub- 
ject, the  humanized  Logos.  Hence  it  may  and  must  be  said  : 
God  is  born,  God  suffered,  God  was  crucified  and  died.  He 
asserted,  therefore,  on  the  one  hand,  the  capability  of  suffer- 
ing and  death  in  the  Logos-personality,  and  on  the  other  hand, 
the  deification  of  the  human  in  Christ. 

Theodoret,  in  three  dialogues  composed  in  447,  attacked 
this  Egyptian  Eutychian  type  of  doctrine  as  a  beggar's  basket 
of  Docetistic,  Gnostic,  Apollinarian,  and  other  heresies,^  and 
advocated  the  qualified  Antiochian  Christology,  i.  e.,  the  doc- 
trine of  the  unfused  union  of  two  natures  in  one  person.  Dio- 
scurus  accused  him  to  the  patriarch  Domnus  in  Antioch  of  di- 
viding the  one  Lord  Christ  into  two  Sons  of  God ;  and  Theodoret 
replied  to  this  with  moderation.  Dioscurus,  on  his  part,  en- 
deavored to  stir  up  the  court  in  Constantinople  against  the 
whole  church  of  Eastern  Asia.  Doranus  and  Theodoret  like- 
wise betook  themselves  to  the  capital,  to  justify  their  doc- 
trine. The  controversy  now  broke  forth  with  greater  vio- 
lence, and  concentrated  on  the  person  of  Eutyches  in  Constan- 
tinople. 

At  a  local  synod  of  the  patriarch  Flavian  at  Constantino- 

'  M'lav  (pvaiv  irpovKw^lv,  koX  TavTT]v  @eov  ffapKw^tvTos  koI  ivaybpanr-fjcrayTos,  or 
as  he  declared  before  the  synod  at  Constantmople :  'OfioXoyca  eK  Svo  <pvaeuv  7676*'- 
vTia^ai  Thv  Kvptov  tjhuv  nph  Trjs  ivqffews '  /uera  Se  t^v  evwcriv  ptiav  (pvatv  o/xoXoyw. 
Mansi,  torn.  \i.  fol.  744.  In  behalf  of  his  view  he  appealed  to  the  Scriptures,  to 
Athanasius  and  Cyril,  and  to  the  council  of  Ephesus  in  431. 

^  The  other  side  imputed  to  Eutychianism  the  doctrine  of  a  heavenly  body,  or  of 
an  apparent  body,  or  of  the  transformation  of  the  Logos  into  flesh.  So  Theodoret, 
Fab.  hasr.  iv.  13.  Eutyches  said,  Christ  had  a  criuixa  av^piirrov,  but  not  a  criua 
av^panrivov,  and  he  denied  the  consubstantiahty  of  his  adp^  with  ours.  Yet  he 
expressly  guarded  himself  against  Docetism,  and  against  all  speculation :  ^va-ioXoyely 
eVouTij)  ovK  iirtTfifna!.  He  was  really  neither  a  philosopher  nor  a  theologian,  but 
only  insisted  on  some  theological  ojjinions  and  points  of  doctrine  with  great  tenacity 
and  obstinacy. 

'  Hence  the  title  of  the  dialogues:  'Epowo-Tijy,  Beggar,  and  UoXv/xopcpos,  the 
Multiform.     Under  this  name  the  Eutychian  speaker  is  introduced.     Theodoret  also 
wrote  an  a7ro\o7ia  virtp  AtoSdpov  koI  QeoSiipou,  which  is  lost. 
VOL,  II. — 47 


Y38  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

pie  in  448  *  Eutyches  was  charged  with  his  error  by  Eusebius, 
bishop  of  Dorylseum  in  Phrygia,  and  upon  his  wilful  refusal, 
after  repeated  challenges,  to  admit  the  dyophysitism  after  the 
incarnation,  and  the  consubstantiality  of  Christ's  body  with 
our  own,  he  was  deposed  and  put  under  the  ban  of  the  church. 
On  his  way  home,  he  was  publicly  insulted  by  the  populace. 
The  council  confessed  its  faith  that  "  Christ,  after  the  incarna- 
tion, consisted  of  two  natures  ^  in  one  hypostasis  and  in  one 
person,  one  Christ,  one  Son,  one  Lord." 

Both  parties  endeavored  to  gain  the  public  opinion,  and 
addressed  themselves  to  distant  bishops,  especially  to  Leo  I.  of 
Rome.  Leo,  in  449,  confirmed  the  decision  of  the  council  in 
several  epistles,  especially  in  a  letter  to  Flavian,  which  forms 
an  epoch  in  the  history  of  Christology,  and  in  which  he  gave  a 
masterly,  profound,  and  clear  analysis  of  the  orthodox  doctrine 
of  two  natures  in  one  person.^  But  Eut3''ches  had  powerful 
friends  among  the  monks  and  at  the  court,  and  a  special  patron 
in  Dioscurus  of  Alexandria,  who  induced  the  emperor  Theo- 
dosius  II.  to  convoke  a  general  council. 

This  synod  met  at  Ephesus,  in  August,  449,  and  consisted 
of  one  hundred  and  thirty-five  bishops.  It  occupies  a  notorious 
place  in  the  chronique  scandaleuse  of  church  history.  Dioscu- 
rus presided,  with  brutal  violence,  protected  by  monks  and  an 
armed  soldiery ;  while  Flavian  and  his  friends  hardly  dared 
open  their  lips,  and  Theodoret  was  entirely  excluded.  When 
an  explanation  from  Eusebius  of  Dorylseum,  who  had  been  the 
accuser  of  Eutyches  at  the  council  of  Constantinople,  was  pre- 

^  "Zvvo^os  ifS-r^novaa.  Its  acts  are  incorporated  in  the  acts  of  the  council  of 
Chalcedon,  in  Mansi,  vi.  649  sqq. 

*  'E/c  5vo  (piKTeuu,  or,  as  Others  more  accurately  said,  ey  Svo  <[>vff€ai, — an  unes- 
sential diiference,  which  reappears  in  the  Creed  of  the  council  of  Chalcedon.  Comp. 
Mansi,  torn.  vi.  fol.  685,  and  Ncander,  iv.  p.  988.  The  first  form  may  be  taken  also 
in  a  monophysite  sense. 

^  This  Epistola  Dograatica  ad  Flavianum  (Ep.  28  in  Ballerini,  24  in  Quesnel), 
which  Leo  transmitted,  with  letters  to  the  emperor  and  the  emperor's  sister,  Pulche- 
ria,  and  the  Robber  Synod,  by  his  legates,  was  afterwards  formally  approved  at  the 
council  of  Chalcedon  in  451,  and  invested  with  almost  symbolical  authority.  It 
may  be  found  in  the  Opera  Leonis,  ed.  Bailer,  tom.  i.  pp.  801-838  ;  in  Mansi,  tom. 
V.  fol.  1359 ;  and  in  Hefele  (Latin  and  German),  ii.  335-346.  Comp.  on  it  also 
Walch,  vi.  p.  182  fP.,  and  Baur,  i.  809  fif. 


§    140.      THE   EUTTCHIAN   CO^'TKOYEKST.  739 

sented,  many  voices  exclaimed:  "Let  Eusebius  be  burnt; 
let  Lim  be  burnt  alive.  As  he  has  cut  Christ  in  two,  so  let 
him  be  cut  in  two." '  The  council  affirmed  the  orthodoxy  and 
sanctity  of  Eutyches,  who  defended  himself  in  person ;  adopted 
the  twelve  anathematisms  of  Cyril ;  condemned  dyophysitism 
as  a  heresy,  and  deposed  and  excommunicated  its  advocates, 
including  Theodoret,  Flavian,  and  Leo.  The  three  Eoman 
delegates  (the  bishops  Jnlius  and  Eenatus,  and  the  deacon 
Hilarus)  dared  not  even  read  before  the  council  the  epistle  ad- 
dressed to  it  by  Leo,''  and  departed  secretly,  that  they  might 
not  be  compelled  to  subscribe  its  decisions.^  Flavian  was  so 
grossly  maltreated  by  furious  monks  that  he  died  of  his  wounds 
a  few  days  later,  in  banishment,  having  first  appealed  to  a  new 
council.  Li  his  stead  the  deacon  Anatolius,  a  friend  and  agent 
of  Dioscurus,  was  chosen  patriarch  of  Constantinople.  He, 
however,  afterwards  went  over  to  the  orthodox  party,  and 
effaced  the  infamy  of  his  elevation  by  his  exquisite  Greek 
hymns. 

The  conduct  of  these  unpriestly  priests  was  through- 
out so  arbitrary  and  tyrannical,  that,  the  second  council  of 
Ephesus  has  ever  since  been  branded  with  the  name  of  the 
"  Council  of  Eobbers."  *  "  JS'othing,"  Neander  justly  observes,' 
"  could  be  more  contradictory  to  the  spiiit  of  the  gospel  than 
the  fanatical  zeal  of  the  dominant  party  in  this  council  for 

'  Cone.  Chalced.  Actio  i.  in  Harduin,  torn.  ii.  fol.  161. 

'  This,  moreover,  made  reference  to  tlie  famous  Epistola  Dogmatica,  addressed  to 
Flavian,  which  vras  also  intended  to  be  read  before  the  council.  Comp.  Hefele,  ii. 
352. 

'  Leo  at  least  asserts  this  in  reference  to  the  deacon  Hilarus.  The  two  other 
delegates  appear  to  have  returned  home  before  the  council  broke  up.  Renatus  does 
not  appear  at  all  in  the  Acta,  but  Theodoret  praises  him  for  his  courage  at  the  Synod 
of  Robbers.     With  the  three  delegates  Leo  sent  also  a  notary,  Dulcitius. 

*  ^vuoSos  \rj(TTpiKri,  latrocinium  Ephesinum;  first  so  called  by  pope  Leo  in  a 
letter  to  Pulcheria,  dated  July  20th,  451  (Ep.  95,  ed.  Ballerini,  alias  Ep.  75).  The 
official  Acta  of  the  Robber  Synod  were  read  before  the  council  of  Chalcedon,  and 
included  in  its  records.  These  of  themselves  show  dark  enough.  But  with  them 
must  be  compared  the  testimony  of  the  defeated  party,  which  was  also  rendered  at 
the  council  of  Chalcedon ;  the  contemporaneous  correspondence  of  Leo ;  and  the 
accounts  of  the  old  historians.  Comp.  the  details  m  Tillemont,  Walch,  Schrockh, 
Xeander,  and  Hefele. 

^  Kirchengesch.  iv.  p.  969  (2d  Germ.  ed.  1847). 


740  THIRD   PEEIOD,    A.D.    311-590. 

dogmatical  formulas,  in  which  thej  fancied  they  had  Christ, 
who  is  spirit  and  life,  although  in  temper  and  act  they  denied 
Him,"  Dioscurus,  for  example,  dismissed  a  charge  of  unchas- 
tity  and  other  vices  against  a  bishop,  with  the  remark :  "  If 
you  have  an  accusation  against  his  orthodoxy,  we  will  receive 
it ;  but  we  have  not  come  together  to  pass  judgment  concern- 
ing unchastity."  '  Thus  fanatical  zeal  for  doctrinal  formulas 
outweighed  all  interests  of  morality,  as  if,  as  Theodoret  re- 
marks, Christ  had  merely  prescribed  a  system  of  doctrine,  and 
had  not  given  also  rules  of  life. 

§  141.     The  Ecumenical  Council  of  Chalcedon^  a.  d.  451. 

Comp.  the  Acta  Concilii,  together  with  the  previous  and  subsequent  epis- 
tolary correspondence,  in  Mansi  (torn,  vii.),  Haeduin  (torn,  ii.),  and 
Fucns,  and  the  sketches  of  Evagritjs:  H.  E.  1.  ii.  c.  4;  among  later 
historians:  "Walch;  Scheookh;  Neandee;  Hefele,  1,  c.  The  latter, 
ii,  392,  gives  the  literature  in  detail. 

Thus  the  party  of  Dioscurus,  by  means  of  the  court  of  the 
weak  Theodosius  II.,  succeeded  in  subjugating  the  Eastern 
church,  which  now  looked  to  the  Western  for  help. 

Leo,  who  occupied  the  papal  chair  from  440  to  461,  with 
an  ability,  a  boldness,  and  an  unction  displayed  by  none  of  his 
predecessors,  and  by  few  of  his  successors,  and  who,  moreover, 
on  this  occasion  represented  the  whole  Occidental  church,  pro- 
tested in  various  letters  against  the  Robber  Synod,  which  had 
presumed  to  depose  him  ;  and  he  wisely  improved  the  per- 
plexed state  of  affairs  to  enhance  the  authority  of  the  papal  see. 
He  wrote  and  acted  with  imposing  dignity,  energy,  circum- 
spection, and  skill,  and  with  a  perfect  mastery  of  the  question 
in  controversy ; — manifestly  the  greatest  mind  and  character 
of  his  age,  and  by  far  the  most  distinguished  among  the  popes 
of  the  ancient  Church.  He  urged  the  calling  of  a  new  council 
in  free  and  orthodox  Italy,  but  afterwards  advised  a  postpone- 
ment, ostensibly  on  account  of  the  disquiet  caused  iu  the  West 
by  Attila's  ravages,  but  probably  in  the  hope  of  reaching  a 

^  At  the  third  session  of  the  council  of  Chalcedon,  Dioscurus  himself  was  accused 
#f  gross  intemperance  and  other  evil  habits.     Comp.  Hefele,  ii.  p.  429. 


§  141.   THE  ECUMENICAL  COUNCIL  OF  CHALCEDON.    741 

satisfactory  result,  even  without  a  council,  by  inducing  the 
bishops  to  subscribe  his  Epistola  Dogmatical 

At  the  same  time  a  political  change  occurred,  which,  as 
was  often  the  case  in  the  East,  brought  with  it  a  doctrinal  re- 
volution. Theodosius  died,  in  July,  450,  in  consequence  of  a 
fall  from  his  horse ;  he  left  no  male  heirs,  and  the  distinguished 
general  and  senator  Marcian  became  his  successor,  b}''  marriage 
with  his  sister  Puleheria,^  who  favored  Pope  Leo  and  the  dyo- 
physite  doctrine.  The  remains  of  Flavian  were  honorably  in- 
terred, and  several  of  the  deposed  bishops  were  reinstated. 

To  restore  the  peace  of  the  empire,  the  new  monarch,  in 
May,-  451,  in  his  own  name  and  that  of  his  "Western  colleague, 
convoked  a  general  council ;  not,  however,  to  meet  in  Italy, 
but  at  Nicaea,  partly  that  he  might  the  better  control  it,  partly 
that  he  might  add  to  its  authority  by  the  memories  of  the  first 
ecumenical  council.  The  edict  was  addressed  to  the  metropol- 
itans, and  reads  as  follows : 

"  That  which  concerns  the  true  faith  and  the  orthodox  reli- 
gion must  be  preferred  to  all  other  things.  For  the  favor  of 
God  to  us  insures  also  the  prosperity  of  our  empire.  Inas- 
much, now,  as  doubts  have  arisen  concerning  the  true  faith,  as 
appears  from  the  letters  of  Leo,  the  most  holy  archbisliop  of 
Rome,  we  have  determined  that  a  holy  council  be  convened  at 
Nicsea,  in  Bithynia,  in  order  that  by  the  consent  of  all  the  truth 
may  be  tested,  and  the  true  faith  dispassionately  and  more  ex- 

'  Respecting  this  apparent  inconsistency  of  Leo,  see  Hefele,  who  considers  it  at 
length,  ii.  387  fif. 

'  Who,  however,  stipulated  as  a  condition  of  the  marriage,  that  she  still  be  al- 
lowed to  keep  her  vow  of  perpetual  virginity.  Marcian  was  a  widower,  sixty  years 
of  age,  and  had  the  reputation  of  great  abihty  and  piety.  Some  authors  place  him, 
as  emperor,  by  the  side  of  Constantine  and  Theodosius,  or  even  above  them.  Comp. 
Leo's  Letters,  Baronius  (Annales),  Tillemont  (Emper.  iii.  284),  and  Gibbon  (at  the 
end  of  ch.  xxxiv.).  The  last-named  author  says  of  Marcian:  "The  zeal  which  he 
displayed  for  the  orthodox  creed,  as  it  was  established  by  the  council  of  Chalcedon, 
would  alone  have  inspired  the  grateful  eloquence  of  the  Cathohcs.  But  the  behavior 
of  Marcian,  in  a  private  life,  and  afterwards  on  the  throne,  may  support  a  more  ra- 
tional belief,  that  he  was  qualified  to  restore  and  invigorate  an  empire,  which  had 
been  almost  dissolved  by  the  successive  weakness  of  two  hereditary  monarchs.  .  . 
His  own  example  gave  weight  to  the  laws  which  he  promulgated  for  the  reforma- 
tion of  maimers." 


742  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

plicitlj  declared,  that  in  time  to  come  no  doubt  nor  division 
may  have  place  concerning  it.  Therefore  let  your  holiness, 
with  a  convenient  number  of  wise  and  orthodox  bishops  from 
among  your  suffragans,  repair  to  Nicsea,  on  the  first  of  Septem- 
ber ensuing.  We  om*selves  also,  unless  hindered  by  wars,  will 
attend  in  person  the  venerable  synod." ' 

Leo,  though  dissatisfied  with  the  time  and  place  of  the 
council,  yielded,  sent  the  bishops  Paschasinus  and  Lucentius, 
and  the  priest  Boniface,  as  legates,  who,  in  conjunction  with 
the  legates  already  in  Constantinople,  were  to  represent  him 
at  the  synod,  over  which  Paschasinus  was  to  preside  in  his 
name.^ 

The  bishops  assembled  at  Niccea,  in  September,  451,  but, 
on  account  of  their  turbulent  conduct,  were  soon  summoned  to 
Chalcedon,  opposite  Constantinople,  that  the  imperial  court 
and  senate  might  attend  in  person,  and  repress,  as  far  as  pos- 
sible, the  violent  outbreaks  of  the  religious  fanaticism  of  the  two 
parties.  Here,  in  the  church  of  St.  Euphemia,  on  a  hill  com- 
manding a  magnificent  prospect,  and  only  two  stadia  or  twelve 
hundred  paces  from  the  Bosphorus,  the  fourth  ecumenical 
council  was  opened  on  the  8th  of  October,  and  sat  till  the  1st 
of  November.  In  nimaber  of  bishops  it  far  exceeded  all  other 
councils  of  the  ancient  Church,^  and  in  doctrinal  importance  is 
second  only  to  the  council  of  Nicaea.  But  all  the  five  or  six 
hundred  bishops,  except  the  j^apal  delegates  and  two  Africans, 
were  Greeks  and  Orientals.  The  papal  delegates  had,  there- 
fore, to  represent  the  whole  of  Latin  Christendom.  The  impe- 
rial commissioners,'*  who  conducted  the  external  course  of  the 
proceedings,  in  the  name  of  the  emperor,  with  the  senators 
present,  sat  in  the  middle  of  the  church,  before  the  screen  of 

'  This  promise  was  in  fact  fulfilled,  although  only  at  one  session,  the  sixth. 

-  Eragrius,  H.  E.  ii.  c.  4 :  "  The  bishops  Paschasinus  and  Lucentius,  and  the 
presbyter  Boniface,  were  the  representatives  of  Leo,  archpriest  of  the  elder  Rome." 
Besides  them  bishop  Julian  of  Cos,  Leo's  legate  at  Constantinople,  also  frequently 
appears  in  the  council,  but  he  had  his  seat  among  the  bishops,  not  the  papal  dele- 
gates. 

^  There  are  only  imperfect  registers  of  the  subscriptions  yet  extant,  and  the 
statements  respecting  the  number  of  members  vary  from  520  to  630. 

*  "Apxovres,  judices.     There  were  six  of  them. 


§  141.   THE  ECUMENICAL  COUNCIL  OF  CHALCEDON.    743 

the  sanctuary.  On  the  left  sat  the  Roman  delegates,  who,  for 
the  first  time  at  an  ecumenical  council,  conducted  the  internal 
proceedings,  as  spiritual  presidents ;  next  them  sat  Anatolius, 
of  Constantinople,  Maximus,  of  Antioch,  and  most  of  the  bishops 
of  the  East ; — all  opponents  of  Eutychianism.  On  the  right 
sat  Dioscurus,  of  Alexandi-ia  (who,  however,  soon  had  to  give 
up  his  place  and  sit  in  tlie  middle),  Juvenal,  of  Jerusalem,  and 
the  other  bishops  of  Egypt,  Illyricum,  and  Palestine ; — the 
Eutychians. 

The  proceedings  were,  from  the  outset,  very  tumultuous, 
and  the  theological  fanaticism  of  the  two  parties  broke  out  at 
times  in  full  blaze,  till  the  laymen  present  were  compelled  to 
remind  the  bishops  of  their  clerical  dignity.'  When  Theodoret, 
of  Cyrus,  was  introduced,  the  Orientals  greeted  him  witJi  en- 
thusiasm, while  the  Egyptians  cried :  "  Cast  out  the  Jew,  the 
enemy  of  God,  the  blasphemer  of  Christ !  "  The  others  retorted, 
with  equal  passion :  "  Cast  out  the  murderer  Dioscurus !  Who 
is  there  that  knows  not  his  crimes?"  The  feeling  against 
ISTestorius  was  so  strong,  that  Theodoret  could  only  quiet  tlie 
council  by  resolving  (in  the  eighth  session)  to  utter  the  anath- 
ema against  his  old  friend,  and  against  all  who  did  not  call 
Mary  "  mother  of  God,"  and  who  divided  the  one  Christ  into 
two  sons.  But  the  abhorrence  of  Eutyches  and  the  Council 
of  Robbers  was  still  stronger,  and  was  favored  by  the  court. 
Under  these  influences  most  of  the  Egyptians  soon  went  over 
to  the  left,  and  confessed  their  error,  some  excusing  themselves 
by  the  violent  measures  brought  to  bear  upon  them  at  the 
Robber  Synod.  The  records  of  that  Synod,  and  of  the  previ- 
ous one  at  Constantinople  (in  448),  with  other  official  docu- 
ments, were  read  by  the  secretaries,  but  were  continually  inter- 
rupted by  incidental  debates,  acclamations,  and  imprecations, 
in  utter  opposition  to  all  our  modern  conceptions  of  parliamen- 
tary decorum,  though  experience  is  continually  presenting  us 
with  fresh  examples  of  the  uncontrollable  vehemence  of  human 
passions  in  excited  assemblies. 

So  early  as  the  close  of  the  first  session  the  decisions  of  the 

^  Such  tumultuous  outcries  (€kjSot7o-6is  5r]fj.oTiKai),  said  the  commissioners  aad 
senators,  ill-beseemed  bishops,  and  were  of  no  advantage  to  either  side. 


744  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Robber  Synod  had  been  annulled,  the  martyr  Flavian  declared 
orthodox,  and  Dioscurus  of  Alexandria,  Juvenal  of  Jerusalem, 
and  other  chiefs  of  Eutychianism,  deposed.  The  Orientals  ex- 
claimed: "jMany  years  to  the  Senate!  Holy  God,  holy 
mighty,  holy  immortal  God,  have  mercy  upon  us.  Many 
years  to  the  emperors!  The  impious  must  always  be  over- 
thrown !  Dioscurus,  the  murderer  [of  Flavian],  Christ  has 
deposed !  This  is  a  righteous  judgment,  a  righteous  senate,  a 
righteous  council !  " 

Dioscuras  was  in  a  subsequent  session  three  times  cited  in 
vain  to  defend  himself  against  various  charges  of  avarice,  in- 
justice, adultery,  and  other  vices,  and  divested  of  all  spiritual 
functions  ;  while  the  five  other  deposed  bishops  acknowledged 
their  error,  and  were  readmitted  into  the  council. 

At  the  second  session,  on  the  10th  of  October,  Dioscurus 
having  already  departed,  the  Mcseno-Constantinopolitan 
symbol,  two  letters  of  Cyril  (but  not  his  anathemas),  and  the 
famous  Epistola  Dogmatica  of  Leo  to  Flavian,  were  read  be- 
fore the  council  amid  loud  applause — the  bishops  exclaiming : 
"  That  is  the  faith  of  the  fathers !  That  is  the  faith  of  the 
apostles !  So  v»'e  all  believe !  So  the  orthodox  believe  !  Anath- 
ema to  him  who  believes  otherwise !  Through  Leo,  Peter 
has  thus  spoken.  Even  so  did  Cyril  teach  !  That  is  the  true 
faith."  ' 

At  the  fifth  and  most  important  session,  on  the  22d  of  Oc- 
tober, the  positive  confession  of  faith  was  adopted,  which  em- 
braces the  Kicaeno-Constantinopolitan  symbol,  and  then,  passing 
on  to  the  point  in  controversy,  expresses  itself  as  follows,  almost 
in  the  words  of  Leo's  classical  epistle :  ^ 

"Following  the  holy  fathers,  we  unanunously  teach  one  and  the  same 
Son,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  complete  as  to  his  Godhead,  and  complete  as 
to  his  manhood ;  truly  God,  and  truly  man,  of  a  reasonahle  soul  and  human 
flesh  subsisting ;  consubstantial  with  the  Father  as  to  his  Godhead,  and 

^  Mansi,  torn.  vi.  971  :  AO'ttj  ?;  ■kIcttis  rwv  Tr-aTtpwv,  uD'ttj  rj  nlaTts  rSiv  atroffTSXccv, 
irdvTes  ovru>  niarexjo/u-ev,  ol  op^SSo^ot  oL't&j  irnnixjovffiv^  avi^ejio,  tw  /jlt]  outo)  vicrrevov' 

T(,  K.T.\. 

*  Complete  in  Mansi,  torn.  vii.  f.  111-118.  The  Creed  is  also  given  by  Evagrius, 
ii.  4. 


§   141.      THE   ECUMENICAL   COUNCIL   OF   CHALCEDON.         74:5 

consubstantial  also  with  us  as  to  his  manhood ; '  like  unto  us  in  all  things, 
yet  without  sin ;  ^  as  to  his  Godhead  begotten  of  the  Father  before  all 
worlds,  but  as  to  his  manhood,  in  these  last  days  born,  for  us  men  and  for 
our  salvation,  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  the  mother  of  God ;  ^  one  and  the  samd'- 
Christ,  Son,  Lord,  Only-begotten,  known  in  (of)  tico  natures,*  without 

'  'Onooia-ios  is  used  in  both  clauses,  though  with  a  shade  of  difference :  Christ's 
homoousia  with  the  Father  implies  numerical  unity  or  identity  of  substance  (God 
being  one  in  essence,  monooicsios) ;  Christ's  homoousia  with  men  means  only  generic 
unity  or  equality  of  nature.     Compare  the  remarks  in  §  130,  p.  672  f. 

^  "Eva  Kal  ahrhv  vlhv  rhv  Kvpiov  7]fj.Siv  'L  Xpitrrbi'  -rhv  ahrhv  eV  ScJttjti  koL  re* 
XiLOV  rhi/  atirhv  eV  av^puiirSTTiTi,  ^ehf  a\T]^uis  Kol  &vbp(inrov  a.\T]bcos  rhv  avThy,  4k 
tf/uxvs  Xoyuc^s  [against  Apollinaris]  koI  GwjiaTos,  ofioovawv  t^  Uarpl  kuto.  tV 
heoTrjTo,  Kal  oixooucriov  rhf  ainhv  'qfuv  kuto,  t?;j'  ai/^panrSTriTa,  Kara  Travra  Huoiov  rjfuv 
XcopJs  afiapriai. 

"  Ttjs  ^(otSkov,  against  Nestorius.  This,  however,  is  immediately  after  modified 
by  the  phrase  koto  tV  aybpooTrSryira  (in  distinction  from  Kara  rr]v  beSTtiTa).  Mary 
was  the  mother  not  merely  of  the  human  nature  of  Jesus,  but  of  the  theanthropic 
person  Jesus  Christ ;  not,  however,  according  to  his  eternal  Godhead,  but  according 
to  his  humanity.  In  like  manner,  the  subject  of  the  passion  was  the  theanthropic 
person,  yet  not  according  to  his  divine  impassible  nature,  but  according  to  his 
human  nature. 

*  'Ej'  Sw  (pvcrecnv,  and  tlie  Latin  translation,  in  duahus  naturis,  is  directed  against 
Eutyches.  The  present  Greek  text  reads,  it  is  true,  e  k  Zvo  (pvaeuv,  which,  however, 
signifies,  and  according  to  the  connection,  can  only  signify,  essentially  the  same 
tiling,  but  is  also  capable  of  being  understood  in  an  Eutychian  and  Monophysite 
sense,  namely,  that  Christ  has  arisen  from  the  confluence  of  two  natures,  and  since 
the  incarnation  has  only  one  nature.  Understood  in  this  sense,  Dioscurus  at  the 
coimcil  was  very  willing  to  accept  the  formula  e/c  Svo  (piaewu.  But  for  this  very 
reason  the  Orientals,  and  also  the  Roman  legates,  protested  with  one  voice  against 
e  »c ,  and  insisted  upon  another  formula  with  eV,  which  was  adopted.  Baur  (L  c.  i. 
p.  820  f )  and  Dorner  (ii.  p.  129)  assert  that  e'/c  is  the  accurate  and  original  expres- 
sion, and  is  a  concession  to  Monophysitism,  that  it  also  agrees  better  (?)  with  the 
verb  yyaipi(ufx€v  (to  recognize  by  certain  tokens)  but  that  it  was  from  the  very  be- 
ginning changed  by  the  Occidentals  into  iv.  But  we  prefer  the  view  of  Gieseler, 
Neander  (iv.  98S),  Hefele  (ii.  451  f ),  and  Beck  (Dogmengeschichte,  p.  251),  that  eV 
5i5o  (pvaetTiv  was  the  original  reading  of  the  symbol,  and  that  it  was  afterwards  al- 
tered in  the  interest  of  Monophysitism.  This  is  proved  by  the  whole  course  of  the 
proceedings  at  the  fifth  session  of  the  council  of  Chalcedon,  where  the  expression  , 

6K  5vo  (pvcreoiv  was  protested  against,  and  is  ^ireved  by  the  testimony  of  the  abbot  /^yhi4itCc' 
Euthymius,  a  cotemporary,  and  by  that  of  Severus,  Evagrius,  and  Leontius  of  By- 
zantium. Severus,  the  Monophysite  patriarch  of  Antioch  since  513,  charges  the 
fathei-s  of  Chalcedon  with  the  inexcusable  crime  of  having  taught :  e  v  S6o  (pva-ea-iv 
aSiaiperois  yucopi^eirbai  rhf  QeSv  (see  Mansi,  vii.  839).  Evagrius  (H.  E.  ii.  5)  main- 
tains that  both  formulas  amount  to  essentially  the  same  thing,  and  reciprocally 
condition  each  other.  Dorner  also  affirms  the  same.  His  words  are :  "  The  Latin 
formula  has  '  to  acknowledge  Christ  as  Son  in  two  natures,'  the  Greek  has  '  to  rec- 


746  THEED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

confusion^  without  conversion^  without  severance^  and  without  division  ;'  the 
distinction  of  the  natures  being  in  no  "n-ise  abolished  by  their  ^union,  but 
the  peculiarity  of  each  nature  being  maintained,  and  both  concurring  in 
one  person  and  hypostasis.^  We  confess  not  a  Son  divided  and  sundered 
into  two  persons,  but  one  and  the  same  Son,  and  Only-begotten,  and  God- 
Logos,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  even  as  the  prophets  had  before  proclaimed 
concerning  him,  and  he  himself  hath' taught  us,  and  the  symbol  of  the 
fathers  hath  handed  down  to  us. 

"  Since  now  we  have  drawn  up  this  decision  with  the  most  comprehen- 
sive exactness  and  circumspection,  the  holy  and  ecumenical  synod  ^  hath 
ordained,  that  no  one  shall  presume  to  propose,  orally,  or  in  writing,  an- 
other faith,  or  to  entertain  or  teach  it  to  others ;  and  that  those  who  shall 
dare  to  give  another  symbol  or  to  teach  another  faith  to  converts  from 
heathenism  or  Judaism,  or  any  heresy,  shall,  if  they  be  bishops  or  clergy- 
men, be  deposed  from  their  bishopric  and  spiritual  function,  or  if  they  be 
monks  or  laymen,  shall  be  excommunicated." 

After  the  public  reading  of  this  confession,  all  the  bishops 
exclaimed :  "  This  is  the  faith  of  the  fathers  ;  this  is  the  faith 
of  the  apostles ;  to  this  we  all  agree ;  thus  we  all  think." 

The  symbol  was  solemnly  ratified  at  the  sixth  session  (Oct. 
25th),  in  the  presence  of  the  emperor  and  the  empress.  The 
emperor  thanked  Christ  for  the  restoration  of  the  unity  of 
faith,  and  threatened  all  with  hea^^  punishment,  who  should 
thereafter  stir  up  new  controversies ;  whereupon  the  synod 
exclaimed :  "  Thou  art  both  priest  and  king,  victor  in  war,  and 
teacher  of  the  faith." 

At  its  subsequent  sessions  the  synod  was  occupied  with  the 
appeal  of  Ibas,  bishop  of  Edessa,  who  had  been  deposed  by 
the  Robber  Synod,  and  was  now  restored ;  with  other  cases  of 
discipline ;  with  some  personal  matters ;  and  with  the  enact- 
ment of  twenty-eight  canons,  which  do  not  concern  us  here.* 

ognize  Christ  as  Son  from  two  natures,'  which  is  plainly  the  same  thought.  The 
Latin  formula  is  only  a  free,  but  essentially  faithful  translation,  only  that  its  coloring 
expresses  somewhat  more  definitely  still  Christ's  subsisting  in  two  natures,  and  is 
therefore  more  literally  conformable  to  the  Roman  t)-pe  of  doctrine"  (1.  c.  ii.  p.  129 

■  'AcrvyxvTais,  arpeVrcos  [against  Eutjches],  adtaipeTw^,  ax'^pto'Toos  [against  Nes- 
torius]  yvwpi^ofxfvov. 

'  Eij  %v  irp6(Tii}TTov  Kol  fxiav  inrScTTacnv. 

^  'H  ayla  Ka\  oiKovfj-fviKT}  avvoZos. 

*  Respecting  the  famous  28th  canon  of  the  council,  which  gives  the  bishop  of 


§   142.      THE   (ORTHODOX   CHEISTOLOGY.  747 

The  emperor,  by  several  edicts,  gave  the  force  of  law  to  the 
decisions  of  the  council,  and  commanded  that  all  Eutychians 
should  be  banished  from  the  empire,  and  their  writings  bm*ned.' 
Pope  Leo  confirmed  the  doctrinal  confession  of  the  council,  but 
protested  against  the  twenty-eighth  canon,  which  placed  the 
patriarch  of  Constantinople  on  an  equality  with  him.  Not- 
withstanding these  ratifications  and  rejoicings,  the  peace  of  the 
Church  was  only  apparent,  and  the  long  Monophysite  troubles 
were  at  hand." 

But  before  we  proceed  to  these,  we  must  enter  into  a  more 
careful  exposition  of  the  Chalcedonian  Christology,  which  has 
become  the  orthodox  doctrine  of  Christendom. 

§  142.    The  Orthodox  ChHstology — Analysis  am,d  Criticism, 

The  first  council  of  Nicsea  had  established  the  eternal  pre- 
existent  Godhead  of  Christ.  The  symbol  of  the  fourth  ecu- 
Constantinople  equal  rights  with  the  bishop  of  Rt)me,  and  places  him  next  after  him 
in  rank,  eomp.  above  §  56  (p.  2Y9  ff.). 

*  Eutyches,  who,  in  the  very  beginning  of  the  controversy,  said  of  himself,  that 
he  had  lived  seventy  years  a  monk,  died  probal:)ly  soon  after  the  meeting  of  the 
council.  Dioscurus  was  banished  to  Gangra,  in  Paphlagonia,  and  Hved  till  454. 
Comp.  Schrockh,  Th.  xviii.  p.  492. 

*  Domer  judges  very  unfavorably  of  the  council  of  Chalcedon  (ii.  p.  83),  and 
denies  it  all  vocation,  inward  or  outward,  to  render  a  positive  decision  of  the  great 
question  in  controversy ;  forgetting  that  the  third  ecumenical  council,  which  con- 
demned Nestorius,  was,  in  Christian  spirit  and  moral  dignity,  decidedly  inferior  to 
the  fourth.  "Notwithstanding  its  630  bishops,"  says  he  (ii.  130),  "it  is  very  far 
from  being  able  to  claim  canonical  authority.  The  fathers  of  this  council  exhibit 
neither  the  harmony  of  an  assembly  animated  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  nor  that  certainty 
of  judgment,  past  wavering  and  inconsistency,  nor  that  manly  comrage  in  maintain- 
ing a  well-gained  conviction,  which  is  possible  where,  out  of  antitheses  long  striving 
for  unity,  a  bright  and  clear  persuasion,  shared  by  the  general  body,  has  arisen." 
Kahnis  (Der  Kirchenglaube,  Bd.  ii.  1864,  p.  89)  judges  as  follows  :  "  The  significance 
of  the  Chalcedonian  symbol  does  not  lie  in  the  ecumenical  character  of  this  council, 
for  ecumenical  is  an  exceedingly  elastic  idea  ;  nor  in  its  results  being  a  development 
of  those  of  the  council  of  Ephesus  (431),  for,  while  at  Ephesus  the  doctrine  of  the 
unity,  here  that  of  the  distinction,  in  Christ's  person,  was  the  victorious  side ;  nor  in 
the  spirit  with  which  all  the  proceedings  were  conducted,  for  passions,  intrigues, 
political  views,  tumultuous  disorder,  &c.,  prevailed  in  it  in  abundant  measure :  but 
it  lies  rather  in  the  unity  of  acknowledgment  which  it  has  received  in  the  Church, 
even  to  our  day,  and  in  the  inner  unity  of  its  definitions." 


748  THIED  PEEIOD.   A.D.   311-690. 

menical  council  relates  to  the  incarnate  Logos,  as  lie  walked 
upon  earth  and  sits  on  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,  and  it  is 
directed  against  errors  which  agree  with  the  Nicene  Creed  as 
opposed  to  Arianism,  but  put  the  Godhead  of  Christ  in  a  false 
relation  to  his  humanity.  It  substantially  completes  the  or- 
thodox Christology  of  the  ancient  Church  ;  for  the  definitions 
added  by  the  Monophysite  and  Monothelite. controversies  are 
few  and  comparatively  unessential. 

The  same  doctrine,  in  its  main  features,  and  almost  in  its 
very  words  (though  with  less  definite  reference  to  E^estorianism 
and  Eutychianism),  was  adopted  in  the  second  part  of  the 
pseudo-Athanasian  Creed,'  and  in  the  sixteenth  century  passed 
into  all  the  confessions  of  the  Protestant  churches.'  Like  the 
IS'icene  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  it  is  the  common  inheritance 
of  Greek,  Latin,  and  Evangelical  Christendom ;  except  that 
Protestantism,  here  as  elsewhere,  reserves  the  right  of  search- 
ing, to  ever  new  depths,  the  inexhaustible  stores  of  this  mys- 
tery in  the  living  Christ  of  the  Gospels  and  the  apostolic 
writings.^ 

'  Comp.  above  §  132. 

^  Comp.  my  article  cited  in  §  132  upon  the  Symbolum  Quicunque.  One  of  the 
briefest  and  clearest  Protestant  definitions  of  the  person  of  Christ  in  the  sense  of  the 
Chalcedonian  formula,  is  the  one  in  the  Westminster  (Presbyterian)  Shorter  Cate- 
chism :  "  Dominus  Jesus  Christus  est  electorum  Dei  Redemptor  unieus,  qui  etemus 
Dei  filius  cum  esset  factus  est  homo ;  adeoque  fuit,  est  eritque  ^eduSrpcuTros,  e  [in] 
naturis  duabus  distinctis  persona  unica  in  sempitemum ; "  or,  as  it  is  in  English :  "  The 
only  Redeemer  of  God's  elect  is  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who,  hdng  the  eternal  Son 
of  God,  became  man,  and  so  teas,  and  continueth  to  be,  God  and  Man,  in  ftco  distinct 
natures,  and  one  person  forever.''''  The  Westminster  Confession  formulates  this 
doctrine  (ch.  viii.  sec.  21)  in  very  nearly  the  words  of  the  Chalcedonian  symbol : 
"  The  Sou  of  God,  the  second  person  in  the  Trinity,  being  very  and  eternal  God,  of 
one  substance  and  equal  with  the  Father,  did,  when  the  fulness  of  time  was  come, 
take  upon  Hun  man's  nature,  with  all  the  essential  properties  and  common  infirmi- 
ties thereof,  yet  without  sm ;  being  conceived  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  in 
the  womb  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  of  her  substance.  So  that  two  whole,  perfect,  and 
distinct  natures, — the  Godhead  and  the  manhood, — were  inseparably  joined  together 
in  one  person,  without  conversion,  composition,  or  confusion.  Which  person  is  very 
God  and  very  man,  yet  one  Christ,  the  only  Mediator  between  God  and  man." 

'  The  Lutheran  Church  has  framed  the  doctrine  of  a  threefold  eommunicatio 
idiomatum,  and  included  it  in  the  Formula  Concordite.  The  controversy  between 
the  Lutheran  theologians  of  Giessen  and  Tiibingen,  in  the  seventeenth  century,  con- 
cerning the  KTTja-ts  (the  possession),  the  xpvo'^s  (the  use),  the  Kpv\pii  (the  secret  use). 


I 


§   142.      THE   ORTHODOX   CHEI8T0L0GY.  749 

The  person  of  Jesus  Christ  in  the  fulness  of  its  theanthropic 
life  cannot  be  exhaustivclj  set  forth  by  any  formulas  of  human 
logic.  Even  the  imperfect,  finite  personahty  of  man  has  a  m.ys- 
terious  background,  that  escapes  the  speculative  comprehension ; 
how  much  more  then  the  perfect  personality  of  Christ,  in  which 
the  tremendous  antitheses  of  Creator  and  creature.  Infinite  and 
finite,  immutable,  eternal  Being  and  changing,  temporal  be- 
coming, are  harmoniously  conjoined !  The  formulas  of  ortho- 
doxy can  neither  beget  the  true  faith,  nor  nom-ish  it ;  they  are 
not  the  bread  and  the  water  of  life,  but  a  standard  for  theolo- 
gical investigation  and  a  rule  of  public  teaching/ 

Such  considerations  suggest  the  true  position  and  the  just 
value  of  the  Creed  of  Chalcedon,  against  both  exaggeration  and 
disparagement.  That  symbol  does  not  aspire  to  comprehend 
the  Christological  mystery,  but  contents  itself  with  setting 
forth  the  facts  and  establishing  the  boundaries  of  orthodox  doc- 
trine. It  does  not  mean  to  preclude  further  theological  discus- 
sion, but  to  guard  against  such  erroneous  conceptions  as  would 
piutilate  either  the  divine  o^  the  human  in  Christ,  or  would 
place  the  two  in  a  false  relation.  It  is  a  light-house,  to  point 
out  to  the  ship  of  Christological  speculation  the  channel  between 
Scylla  and  Charybdis,  and  to  save  it  from  stranding  upon  the 
reefs  of  ITestorian  dyophysitism  or  of  Eutychian  monophy- 
sitism.  It  contents  itself  with  settling,  in  clear  outlines,  the 
eternal  result  of  the  theanthropic  process  of  incarnation,  leav- 
ing the  study  of  i\i&  process  itself  to  scientific  theology.  The 
dogmatic  letter  of  Leo,  it  is  true,  takes  a  step  beyond  this, 
towards  a  theological  interpretation  of  the  doctiine ;  but  for 

and  the  KeVoxny  (the  entire  abdication)  of  the  divine  attributes  by  the  incarnate 
Logos,  led  to  no  definite  results,  and  was  swallowed  up  in  the  thirty  years'  war.  It 
has  been  resumed  in  modified  form  by  modem  German  divines. 

^  Comp.  Cunningham  (Historical  Theology,  vol.  i.  p.  319):  "  The  chief  use  now 
to  be  made  of  an  examination  of  these  controversies  [the  Eutychian  and  Xestorian] 
is  not  so  much  to  guard  us  against  errors  [?]  which  may  be  pressed  upon  us,  and 
into  which  we  may  be  tempted  to  fall,  but  rather  to  aid  us  in  forming  clear  and  def- 
inite conceptions  of  the  truths  regarding  the  person  of  Christ,  which  all  profess  to 
believe ;  in  securing  precision  and  accuracy  of  language  in  explaining  them,  and 
especially  to  assist  us  in  reaHzing  them ;  in  habitually  regarding  as  great  and  actual 
reahties  the  leading  features  of  the  constitution  of  Christ's  person,  which  the  word 
of  God  unfolds  to  us." 


750  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

this  very  reason  it  cannot  have  the  same  binding  and  norma- 
tive force  as  the  symbol  itself. 

As  the  Nicene  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  stands  midway  be- 
tween tritheism  and  Sabellianism,  so  the  Chalcedonian  formula 
strikes  the  true  mean  between  !N"estorianism  and  Eutychianism. 

It  accepts  dyophysitism ;  and  so  far  it  unquestionably  fa- 
vored and  satisfied  the  moderate  Antiochian  party  rather  than 
the  Egyptian.'  But  at  the  same  time  it  teaches  with  equal 
distinctness,  in  opposition  to  consistent  l^estorianism,  the  in- 
separable unity  of  the  person  of  Christ. 

The  following  are  the  leading  ideas  of  this  symbol : 

1.  A  true  incarnation  of  the  Logos,  or  of  the  second  person 
in  the  Godhead.'*  The  motive  is  the  unfathomable  love  of  God ; 
the  end,  the  redemption  of  the  fallen  race,  and  its  reconciliation 
with  God.  This  incarnation  is  neither  a  conversion  of  God 
into  a  man,  nor  a  conversion  of  a  man  into  God ;  neither  a 
humanizing  of  the  divine,  nor  a  deification  or  apotheosis  of  the 
human ;  nor  on  the  other  hand  is  it  a  mere  outward,  transitory 
connection  of  the  two  factors;  butmn  actual  and  abiding  union 
of  the  two  in  one  personal  life. 

It  is  primarily  and  pre-eminently  a  condescension  and  self- 
humiliation  of  the  divine  Logos  to  human  nature,  and  at  the 
same  time  a  consequent  assumption  and  exaltation  of  the  human 
nature  to  inseparable  and  eternal  communion  with  the  divine 
person.  The  Logos  assinnes  the  body,  soul,  and  spirit  of  man, 
and  enters  into  all  the  circumstances  and  infirmities  of  human 
life  on  earth,  with  the  single  exception  of  sin,  which  indeed  is 
not  an  essential  or  necessary  element  of  humanity,  but  acci- 

'  Accordingly  in  Leo's  Epistola  Dogmatica  also,  which  was  the  basis  of  the 
Creed,  Nestorius  is  not  even  mentioned,  while  Eutyches,  on  the  other  hand,  is  refuted 
at  length.  But  in  a  later  letter  of  Leo,  addressed  to  the  emperor,  a.  d.  457  (Ep.  156, 
ed.  BaUerini),  he  classes  Nestorius  and  Eutyches  together,  as  equally  dangerous 
heretics.  The  Creed  of  Chalcedon  is  also  regarded  by  Baur,  Niedner,  and  Dorner 
as  exhibiting  a  certain  degree  of  preference  for  the  Nestorian  dyophysitism. 

"^  ''Evav^p(iTrr](ns  Qeov,  iixrapKuaii,  incamatio, — in  distinction  from  a  mere  (two.' 
(peia,  conjundio,  or  ffxeTinr]  fvuffts,  of  the  divine  and  human,  by  np6cT\T]^is  (from 
■KpoaXa/xfidvu),  assumpiio,  of  the  human,  and  ivoiKijais  of  the  divine ;  and  on  the 
other  hand,  from  a  <pv<TiK^i  'ivwais,  or  /cpuo-jy,  o-vyx"""'^)  or  adpKaxris  in  the  sense  of 
transmutation.  The  diametrical  opposite  of  the  ivav^pwTrrjffis  Qeov  is  the  heathen 
anobiuffis  av^piinov. 


§   142.      THE  OETHODOX  CHEISTOLOGY.  751 

dental  to  it.  "  Tlie  Lord  of  tlie  universe,"  as  Leo  puts  the 
matter  in  liis  epistle,  "  took  the  form  of  a  servant ;  the  impas- 
sible God  became  a  suffering  man ;  the  Immortal  One  submitted 
himself  to  the  dominion  of  death ;  Majesty  assumed  into  itself 
lowliness;  Strength,  wealmess;  Eternity,  mortality."  The 
same,  who  is  true  God,  is  also  true  man,  without  either  element 
being  altered  or  annihilated  by  the  other,  or  being  degraded  to 
*a  mere  accident. 

Tliis  mysterious  union  came  to  pass,  in  an  incomprehensible 
way,  through  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  in  the  virgin  womb 
of  Mary.  But  whether  the  miraculous  conception  was  only 
the  beginning,  or  whether  it  at  the  same  time  completed  the 
union,  is  not  decided  in  the  Creed  of  Chalcedon.  According  to 
his  human  nature  at  least,  Christ  submitted  himself  to  the  laws 
of  gradual  development  and  moral  conflict,  without  which,  in- 
deed, he  could  be  no  example  at  all  for  us. 

2.  The  precise  distinction  between  nature  and  perso7i.  l^a- 
ture  or  substance  is  the  totality  of  powers  and  qualities  which 
constitute  a  being ;  person  is  the  Ego,  the  self-conscious,  self- 
asserting,  and  acting  subject.  There  is  no  person  without  na- 
tuTe,  but  there  may  be  nature  without  person  (as  in  irrational 
beings).*  The  Church  doctrine  distinguishes '  in  the  Holy 
Trinity  three  persons  (though  not  in  the  ordinary  human  sense 
of  the  word)  in  one  divine  nature  or  substance  which  they  have 
in  common  ;  in  its  Christology  it  teaches,  conversely,  two  na- 
tures in  one  person  (in  the  usual  sense  of  person)  which  per- 
vades both.  Therefore  it  caimot  be  said  :  The  Logos  assumed 
a  \mraa.Ji  perso7i,'^  or  united  himself  with  a  definite  hmnan  indi- 
vidual :  for  then  the  God-Man  would  consist  of  two  persons ; 
but  he  took  upon  himself  the  human  nature,  which  is  common 
to  all  men ;  and  therefore  he  redeemed  not  a  particular  man, 

*  Compare  the  weighty  dissertation  of  Boethius  :  De  diiabus  naturh  et  una  per- 
sona Chrisii,  adversus  Eiitychen  et  Kestorium  (Opera,  ed.  Basil.,  1546,  pp.  948-957), 
in  which  he  defines  natura  {(pvats  or  ova-ia),  substantia  {vnScTTaais),  and  persona 
{■irp6(7wirov).     "  I^atura"  he  says,  "  est  cujuslibet  substantia?  specificata  proprietas ;  .<L* 

persona  vero  rationabilis  naturas  individua  subsistentia." 

^  TiXeiov  &.vSipwirov  (1\-n(p(,  as  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  and  the  strict  Nestorians  k! 

expressed  themselves. 


752  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D,    311-690. 

but  all  men,  as  partakers  of  the  same  nature  or  substance.'  The 
personal  Logos  did  not  become  an  individual  aVB^pwTro?,  but 
adp^,  flesh,  which  includes  the  whole  of  human  nature,  body, 
soul,  and  spirit.  The  personal  self-conscious  Ego  resides  in  the 
Logos.     But  into  this  point  we  shall  enter  more  fully  below. 

3.  The  result  of  the  incarnation,  that  infinite  act  of  divine 
love,  is  the  God-Man.  JSTot  a  (ISTestorian)  doiible  bemg,  with 
two  persons ;  nor  a  compound  (Apollinarian  or  Monophysite) 
middle  being,  a  tertium  quid,  neither  divine  oior  human  ;  but 
one  person,  who  is  hoth  divine  and  human.  Christ  has  a  ra- 
tional human  soul,  and — according  to  a  definition  afterwards 
added — a  human  will,^  and  is  therefore  in  the  full  sense  of  the 

'  As  Augustine  says :  Deus  Verbum  non  accepit  personam  hominis,  sed  naturam^ 
et  in  etemam  personam  divinitatis  accepit  temporalem  substantiam  camis.  And 
again:  "Deus  naturam  nostram,  id  est,  animam  rationalem  carnemque  hominis 
Christi  suscepit."  (De  corrept.  et  grat.  §  30,  torn.  x.  f.  766.)  Comp.  Johannes 
Damascenus,  De  fide  orthod.  iii.  c.  6, 11.  The  Anglican  theologian,  Richard  Hooker, 
styled  on  account  of  his  sober  equipoise  of  intellect  "  the  judicious  Hooker," 
sets  forth  this  point  of  the  Church  doctrine  as  follows  :  "He  took  not  angels  but 
the  seed  of  Abraham.  It  pleased  not  the  "Word  or  Wisdom  of  God  to  take  to  itself 
some  one  person  amongst  men,  for  then  should  that  one  have  been  advanced  which 
was  assumed,  and  no  more,  but  Wisdom  to  the  end  she  might  save  many  buUt  her 
house  of  that  Nature  which  is  common  unto  all,  she  made  not  this  or  that  man  her 
habitation,  but  dwelt  in  its.  If  the  Son  of  God  had  taken  to  himself  a  man  now 
made  and  already  perfected,  it  would  of  necessity  follow,  that  there  are  in  Christ 
two  persons,  the  one  assuming,  and  the  other  assumed ;  whereas  the  Son  of  God 
did  not  assume  a  man's  person  into  his  own,  but  a  man's  nature  to  his  own  person ; 
and  therefore  took  semen,  the  seed  of  Abraham,  the  very  first  original  and  element 
of  our  nature,  before  it  was  come  to  have  any  personal  human  subsistence.  The  flesh 
and  the  conjunction  of  the  flesh  with  God  began  both  at  one  instant;  his  making 
and  taking  to  himself  our  flesh  was  but  one  act,  so  that  in  Christ  there  is  no  personal 
subsistence  but  one,  and  that  from  everlasting.  By  taking  only  the  nature  of  man 
he  still  continueth  one  person,  and  changeth  but  the  manner  of  his  subsisting,  which 
was  before  in  the  glory  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  is  now  in  the  habit  of  our  flesh." 
(Ecclesiastical  Polity,  book  v.  ch.  52,  in  Keble's  edition  of  Hooker's  works,  vol.  ii. 
p.  286  f.)  In  just  the  same  manner  Anastasius  Sinaita  and  John  of  Damascus  ex- 
press themselves.  Comp.  Domer,  ii.  p.  183  fif.  Hooker's  allusion  to  Heb.  ii.  16  (ou 
yap  5-r]irov  ayyiXosv  i'iri\afj.0d.perai,  aWa  aiTipjxaTos  'h^paafj.  iiri\a/j.0a.veTai),  it  may 
be  remarked,  rests  upon  a  false  interpretation,  since  iTri\aiJ.0dvecrSrai  docs  not  refer 
to  the  incarnation,  but  signifies :  to  take  hold  of  in  order  to  help  or  redeem  (as 
in  Sirach,  iv.  11).     Comp.  Po7]bv(rai,  Heb.  ii.  18. 

*  The  sixth  ecumenical  council,  held  at  Constantinople,  a.  d.  680,  condemned 
nronothelitism,  and  decided  in  favor  of  dyothehtism,  or  the  doctrine  of  two  wills 


§    142.      THE   OETHODOX   CHKISTOLOGT.  753 

word  the  Son  of  man ;  while  yet  at  the  same  time  he  is  the  eter- 
nal Son  of  God  in  one  person,  with  one  undivided  self-con- 
scionsness. 

4.  The  duality  of  the  natures.  This  was  the  element  of 
truth  in  Nestorianism,  and  on  this  the  council  of  Chalcedon 
laid  chief  stress,  because  this  council  was  principally  concerned 
with  the  condemnation  of  Eutychianism  or  monophysitism,  as 
that  of  Ephesus  (431)  had  been  with  the  condemnation  of  IS'es- 
torianism,  or  abstract  dyophysitism.  Both  views,  indeed,  ad- 
mitted the  distinction  of  the  natures,  but  Eutychianism  denied 
it  after  the  act  of  the  incarnation,  and  (like  ApoUinarianism) 
made  Christ  a  middle  being,  an  amalgam,  as  it  were,  of  the  two 
natures,  or,  more  accurately,  one  nature  in  which  the  human 
element  is  absorbed  and  deified. 

Against  this  it  is  affirmed  by  the  Creed  of  Chalcedon,  that 
even  after  the  incarnation,  and  to  all  eternity,  the  distinction 
of  the  natures  continues,  without  confusion  or  conversion,'  yet, 
on  the  other  hand,  without  separation  or  division,''  so  that  the 
divine  will  remain  ever  divine,  and  the  human,  ever  human,' 
and  yet  the  two  have  continually  one  common  life,  and  inter- 
penetrate each  other,  like  the  persons  of  the  Trinity.^ 

(or  volitions)  in  Christ,  which  are  necessary  to  the  ethical  conflict  and  victory  of  his 
own  life  and  to  his  office  as  an  example  for  us.  This  council  teaches  (Mansi,  torn. 
xi.  637) :  Avo  (pvcriKas  ^eXrjaets  ^rot  &eKrifj.a,Ta  iv  ahrQ  kuX  Zio  <pvcriKas  iyepyeias 
aSiaipercos,  aTpiirrais,  a^epiorois,  aavyx^Ti^s  .  .  ,  K7]pvTT0)xiv.  These  wills  are  not 
opposite  to  one  another,  but  the  human  will  is  ever  in  harmony  with  the  divine,  and 
in  all  things  obedient  to  it.  "  Not  my  will,  but  thine  be  done  : "  therein  is  found 
the  distinction  and  the  imity. 

*  'Kavyx^Tf^s  and  arpeVTwy. 
"^  'ASiaipeTiiis  and  axo^picrais. 

^  "  Tenet,"  says  Leo,  in  his  epistle  to  Flavian,  "sine  defectu  proprietatem  suam  \_/ 

utraque  natura,  et  sicut  formam  servi  Dei  fonna^  non  adimit,  ita  formam  Dei  servi        l-  / 
forma  non  minuit ....  Agit  utraque  cum  alterius  communione  quod  proprium  est ;  / 

Verbo  scilicet  operante  quod  Verbi  est,  et  came  exsequente  quod  camis  est.   Unum  i 

horum  coruscat  miraculis,  aliud  succumbit  injuriis." 

*  Here  belongs  John  of  Damascus'  doctrine  of  the  irepix'^p7]Tis,  permeatio,  cir- 
cummeafio,  ciradailo,  ch'cumincessio,  intercommunio,  or  reciprocal  indwelling  and 
pervasion,  which  has  relation  not  merely  to  the  Trinity,  but  also  to  Christology.  The 
verb  Ttepix't'pi'iy  is,  so  far  as  I  know,  first  appUed  by  Gregory  of  Nyssa  (Contra 
Apolliuarium)  to  the  interpenetration  and  reciprocal  pervasion  of  the  two  natures  in 
Christ.     On  this  rested  also  the  doctrine  of  the  exchange  or  communication  of  at- 

VOL.  II. — 48 


754  THIRD   PEEIOD,    A.D.    311-590. 

The  continuance  of  the  divine  nature  unaltered  is  involved 
in  its  unchangeableness,  and  was  substantially  conceded  by  all 
parties.  The  controversy,  therefore,  had  reference  only  to  the 
human  nature. 

And  here  the  Scriptures  are  plainly  not  on  the  Eutychian 
side.  The  Christ  of  the  Gospels  by  no  means  makes  the  im- 
pression of  a  person  in  whom  the  human  nature  had  been 
absorbed,  or  extinguished,  or  even  weakened  by  the  divine ;  on 
the  contrary,  he  appears  from  the  nativity  to  the  sepulchre 
as  genuinely  and  truly  human  in  the  highest  and  fairest  sense 
of  the  word.  The  body  which  he  liad  of  the  substance  of 
Mary,  was  born,  grew,  hungered  and  thirsted,  slept  and  woke, 
suffered  and  died,  and  was  buried,  like  any  other  human  body. 
His  rational  soul  felt  joy  and  sorrow,  thought,  spoke,  and 
acted  after  the  manner  of  men.  The  only  change  which  his 
human  nature  underwent,  was  its  development  to  full  man- 
hood, mental  and  physical,  in  common  with  other  men,  accord- 
ing to  the  laws  of  growth,  yet  normally,  without  sin  or 
inward  schism;  and  its  ennoblement  and  completion  by  its 
union  with  the  divine. 

5.  The  imity  of  the  jpersoti.'  This  was  the  element  of 
truth  in  Eutychianism  and  the  later  monopliysitism,  which, 
however,  they  urged  at  the  expense  of  the  human  factor. 
Tliere  is  only  one  and  the  self-same  Christ,  one  Lord,  one  Re- 
deemer. There  is  an  unity  in  the  distinction,  as  well  as  a  dis- 
tinction in  the  unity.  "  The  same  who  is  true  God,"  says 
Leo,  "  is  also  true  man,  and  in  this  unity  there  is  no  deceit ; 

tributes,  AfTi'Socris,  arTi^eTao-TOfrty,  Koivupla  iSiaifidrwy,  communicatio  idmnatum. 
The  a.vTtfieTd(XTa(ni  ruv  oi/ofidruv,  also  avrt/j-e^icrTacn^,  transmutatio  proprietatum, 
transmutation  of  attributes,  is,  strictly  speaking,  not  identical  with  drTiSocrir,  but  a 
deduction  from  it,  and  the  rhetorical  expression  for  it.  The  doctrine  of  the  com- 
municatio idiomatum,  however,  awaited  a  full  development  much  later,  in  the 
Lutheran  church,  where  great  subtlety  was  employed  in  perfecting  it.  This 
Lutheran  doctrine  has  never  found  access  into  the  Reformed  church,  and  least  of  all 
the  ubiquitarian  hypothesis  invented  as  a  prop  to  cousubstantiation ;  although  a 
certain  measure  of  truth  lies  at  the  basis  of  this,  if  it  is  apprehended  dynamically, 
and  not  materially. 

'  The  eV&xrts  ko^'  vnSaTaffiv,  or  eVoxris  virocTTaTiKT],  unio  hypostatica  or  persona- 
lis, unitas  personas.  The  unio  personalis  is  the  status  unionis,  the  result  of  the  uui- 
tio  or  incarnatioTy  ''i 


T^ 


-r. 


§   142.      THE   ORTHODOX   CHRISTOLOGT.  755 

for  in  it  the  lowliness  of  man  and  the  majesty  of  God  per- 
fectly pervade  one  another.  .  .  .  Because  the  two  natures 
make  only  one  person,  we  read  on  the  one  hand  :  '  The  Son  of 
man  came  down  from  heaven'  (John  iii,  13),  while  yet  the 
Son  of  God  took  flesh  from  the  Yirgin ;  and  on  the  other :  '  The 
Son  of  God  was  crucified  and  bm-ied '  (1  Cor.  ii.  8),  while  yet 
he  suffered  not  in  his  Godhead  as  co-eternal  and  eonsubstan- 
tial  with  the  Father,  but  in  the  weakness  of  human  nature." 

Here  again  the  Chalcedonian  formula  has  a  firm  and  c^ear 
basis  in  Scripture.  In  the  gospel  history  this  personal  unity 
everywhere  unmistakably  appears.  The  self-consciousness 
of  Christ  is  not  divided.  It  is  one  and  the  self-same  thean- 
thropic  subject  that  speaks,  acts,  and  suflers,  that  rises  from 
the  dead,  ascends  to  heaven,  sits  at  the  right  hand  of  God, 
and  shall  come  again  in  glory  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead. 

The  divine  and  the  human  are  as  far  from  forming  a 
double  personality  in  Christ,  as  the  soul  and  the  body  in  man, 
or  as  the  regenerate  and  the  natural  life  in  the  believer.  As 
the  human  personality  consists  of  such  a  union  of  the  material 
and  the  spiritual  natures  that  the  spirit  is  the  ruling  principle 
and  personal  centre :  so  does  the  person  of  Christ  consist  in 
such  a  union  of  the  human  and  the  divine  natures  that  the 
divine  nature  is  the  seat  of  self-consciousness,  and  pervades 
and  animates  the  human.' 

'  Comp.  the  Athanasian  Creed :  "  Sicut  anima  rationalis  et  caro  imus  est  homo, 
ita  Deus  et  homo  unus  est  Christus."  In  the  same  way  does  Augustine  express 
hknself,  and  mdeed  this  passage  in  the  Creed,  as  well  as  several  others,  appears  to 
be  taken  from  him.  Dr.  Shedd  (History  of  Christian  Doctrine,  i.  p.  402)  carries  out 
vividly  this  analogy  of  the  human  personality  with  that  of  Christ,  as  follows :  "  This 
union  of  the  two  natures  in  one  self-conscious  Ego  may  be  illustrated  by  reference 
to  man's  personal  constitution.  An  individual  man  is  one  person.  But  this  one  per- 
son consists  of  two  natures, — a  material  nature  and  a  mental  nature.  The  personal- 
ity, the  self-consciousness,  is  the  resultant  of  the  union  of  the  two.  Neither  one  of 
itself  makes  the  person."  [This  is  not  quite  exact.  Person  aUty  lies  in  the  reasona- 
ble soul,  which  can  maintain  its  self-conscious  existence  without  the  body,  even  as 
in  Christ  His  personality  resides  in  the  divine  nature,  as  Dr.  Shedd  himself  clearly 
states  on  p.  406.]  "Both  body  and  soul  are  requisite  in  order  to  a  comj^lete 
individuaUty.  The  two  natures  do  not  make  two  individuals.  The  material  nature, 
taken  by  itself,  is  not  the  man ;  and  the  mental  part,  taken  by  itself,  is  not  the  man. 
But  only  the  imion  of  the  two  is.     Yet  in  this  intimate  union  of  two  such  diverse 


756  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

I  may  refer  also  to  the  familiar  ancient  analogy  of  the  fire 
and  the  iron. 

6,  The  whole  worlc  of  Christ  is  to  be  referred  to  Iris, person, 
and  not  to  be  attributed  to  the  one  or  the  other  nature  ex- 
clusively. It  is  the  one  divine-human  Christ,  who  wrought 
miracles  of  almighty  power, — by  virtue  of  the  divine  nature 
dwelling  in  him, — and  who  suffered  and  was  buried, — accord- 
ing to  his  passible,  human  nature.  The  person  was  the 
subject,  the  human  nature  the  seat  and  the  sensorium,  of  the 
passion.  It  is  by  this  hypostatical  union  of  the  divine  and 
the  human  natures  in  all  the  stages  of  the  humiliation 
and  exaltation  of  Christ,  that  his  work  and  his  merits 
acquire  an  infinite  and  at  the  same  time  a  genuinely  human 
and  exemplary  significance  for  us.  Because  the  ^ocZ-Man 
suffered,  his  death  is  the  reconciliation  of  the  world  with 
God ;  and  because  he  suffered  as  Man,  he  has  left  us  an  exam- 
ple, that  we  should  follow  his  steps.'* 

substances  as  matter  and  mind,  body  and  soul,  there  is  not  the  slightest  alteration 
of  the  properties  of  each  substance  or  nature.  The  body  of  a  man  is  as  truly  and 
purely  material  as  a  piece  of  granite ;  and  the  immortal  mind  of  a  man  is  as  truly 
and  purely  spiritual  and  immaterial  as  the  Godhead  itself.  Neither  the  material 
part  nor  the  mental  part,  taken  by  itself,  and  in  separation,  constitutes  the  person- 
ality; otherwise  every  human  individual  would  be  two  persons  in  juxtaposition. 
There  is  therefore  a  material  'nature,'  but  no  material  'person,'  and  there  is  a 
mental  '  nature,'  but  no  mental  '  person.'  The  person  is  the  ^mion  of  these  two 
natures,  and  is  not  to  be  denominated  either  material  or  mental,  but  human.  In 
like  manner  the  person  of  Christ  takes  its  denomination  of  theanihropic,  or  divine- 
human,  neither  from  the  divine  nature  alone,  nor  the  human  nature  alone,  but  from 
the  union  of  both  natures." 

^  Here  also  the  orthodox  Protestant  theology  is  quite  in  agreement  with  the  old 
Catholic.  We  cite  two  examples  from  the  two  opposite  wings  of  English  Protestan- 
tism. The  Episcopalian  theologian,  Richard  Hooker,  says,  with  evident  reference  to 
the  above-quoted  passage  from  the  letter  of  Leo :  "  To  Christ  we  ascribe  both  work- 
ing of  wonders  and  suffering  of  pains,  we  use  concerning  Him  speeches  as  well  of 
humility  as  of  divine  glory,  but  the  one  we  apply  unto  that  nature  which  He  took 
of  the  Virgin  Mary,  the  other  to  that  which  was  in  the  beginning  "  (Eccles.  Polity, 
book  V.  ch.  52,  vol.  ii.  p.  291,  Keble's  edition).  The  great  Puritan  theologian  of 
the  seventeenth  century,  John  Owen,  says,  yet  more  expUcitly :  "  In  all  that  Christ 
did  as  the  King,  Priest,  and  Prophet  of  the  church, — in  all  that  He  did  and  suffered, 
in  all  that  He  continueth  to  do  for  us,  in  or  by  virtue  of  whether  nature  soever  it  be 
done  or  wrought, — it  is  not  to  be  considered  as  the  act  and  work  of  this  or  that 
nature  in  Him  alone,  but  it  is  the  act  and  work  of  the  whole  person, — of  Him  that 


§   142.      THE   ORTHODOX   CHEISTOLOGT.  757 

7.  The  anhypostasia,  impersonality^  or,  to  speak  more 
accurately,  the  enhypostasia,  of  the  liuman  nature  of  Christ. 
This  is  a  difficult  pointy  but  a  necessary  link  in  the  ortho- 
dox doctrine  of  the  one  God-Man ;  for  otherwise  "we  must 
have  two  persons  in  Christ,  and,  after  the  incarnation,  a  fourth 
person,  and  that  a  human,  in  the  divine  Trinity.  The  imper- 
sonality of  Christ's  human  nature,  however,  is  not  to  be  taken 
as  absolute,  but  relative,  as  the  following  considerations  will 
show. 

The  centre  of  personal  life  in  the  God-Man  resides  unques- 
tionably in  the  Logos,  who  was  from  eternity  the  second  per- 
son in  the  Godhead,  and  could  not  lose  his  personality.  He 
united  himself,  as  has  been  already  observed,  not  with  a 
human  person,  but  with  human  nature.  The  divine  nature  is 
therefore  the  root  and  basis  of  the  personality  of  Christ. 
Christ  himself,  moreover,  always  speaks  and  acts  in  the  fall 
consciousness  of  his  divine  origin  and  character;  as  having 
come  from  the  Father,  having  been  sent  by  him,  and,  even 
during  his  earthly  life,  living  in  heaven  and  in  unbroken  com- 
munion with  the  Father.'  And  the  human  nature  of  Christ 
had  no  independent  personality  of  its  own,  besides  the  divine  ; 
it  had  no  existence  at  all  before  the  incarnation,  but  began 
with  this  act,  and  was  so  incorporated  with  the  pre-existent 
Logos-personality  as  to  find  in  this  alone  its  own  full  self- 
is  both  God  and  man  in  one  person."  (Declaration  of  the  Glorious  Mystery  of  the 
Person  of  Christ ;  chap,  xviii.,  in  Owen's  WorliS,  toI.  i.  p.  234).  Comp.  also  the 
admirable  exposition  of  the  article  Passus  est  in  Bishop  Pearson's  Exposition  of  the 
Creed  (ed.  Dobson,  p.  283  ff.). 

^  The  Logos  is,  according  to  the  scholastic  terminology  of  the  later  Greek  theo- 
logians, especially  John  of  Damascus,  ISioo-uo-totos,  or  iSionTro'o-TaTos,  i.  e.,  per  se 
subsistens,  and  tSioTrepiJpio-Toj,  proprio  termino  circumscriptus.  "  Hasc  et  simiUa 
Tocabula,"  says  the  learned  Petavius  (Theol.  Dogm.  torn.  iv.  p.  430),  "  demonstrant 
hypostasin  non  aliena  ope  fultam  ac  sustentatam  existere,  sed  per  semet  ipsam,  ac 
proprio  termino  definitam."  Schleiermacher's  Christology  therefore,  on  this  point, 
forms  the  direct  opposite  of  the  Chalcedonian ;  it  makes  the  man  Jesus  the  bearer 
of  the  personahty,  that  is,  transfers  the  proper  centre  of  gravity  in  the  personaUty 
to  the  human  individuaUty  of  Christ,  and  views  the  divine  natiire  as  the  supreme 
revelation  of  God  in  Him,  as  an  impersonal  principle,  as  a  ■vdtal  power.  In  this 
view  the  proper  idea  of  the  incarnation  is  lost.  The  same  thing  is  true  of  the 
Christology  of  Hase,  Keim,  Beyschlag  (and  E.  Rothe). 


758  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

consciousness,  and  to  be  permeated  and  controlled  by  it  in 
every  stage  of  its  development.  But  the  human  nature  forms 
a  necessary  element  in  the  divine  personality,  and  in  this  sense 
■U'e  may  say  with  the  older  Protestant  theologians,  that  Christ 
is  a  persona  avv^ero^,  which  was  divine  and  human  at  once.' 

Thus  interpreted,  the  church  doctrine  of  the  euhypostasia 
presents  no  very  great  metaphysical  or  psychological  difficulty. 
It  is  true  we  cannot,  according  to  our  modern  way  of  thinking, 
conceive  a  complete  human  nature  without  personality.  We 
make  personality  itself  consist  in  intelligence  and  free  will,  so 
that  without  it  the  nature  sinks  to  a  mere  abstraction  of 
powers,  qualities,  and  ftiuctious.''  But  the  human  nature  of 
Jesus  never  was,  in  fact,  alone ;  it  was  from  the  beginning 
inseparably  united  with  another  nature,  which  is  personal,  and 
which  assumed  the  human  into  a  unity  of  life  with  itself. 
The  Logos-personality  is  in  this  case  the  light  of  self-conscious- 
ness, and  the  impelling  power  of  will,  and  pervades  as  well 
the  human  natm-e  as  the  divine.^ 

/ 

^  The  correct  Greek  expression  is,  therefore,  not  awnoaraaia,  but  ivvvoaTauia.. 
The  humaa- nature  of-Ghrist  was-cj^i/irdcTaTos,  impersonalis,  befwe  the  iHcaraation, 
Uui  became  ivvir6(rTa.Tos  by  the  incarnation,  that  is,  eV  am^  rp  toG  0eoD  Koyov  vtto- 
(TTairei  vvoiTTacra,  and  also  erepoviroffTaTos,  and  crvyvTrSffraTos  (compersonata),  i.  e., 
quod  per  se  et  proprio  modo  non  subsistit,  sed  inest  in  alio  per  se  subsistente  et 
substantia  cum  eo  copulatur.  Christ  did  not  assume  a  human  person,  but  a  humana 
natura,  in  qua  ipse  Deus  homo  nasceretur.  The  doctrine  of  the  a?ihypostasia,  im- 
personalitas,  or  rather  e?ihypostasia,  of  the  human  nature  of  Christ,  is  already 
observed,  in  incipient  form,  in  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  and  was  afterwards  more  fully 
developed  by  John  of  Damascus  (De  orthodoxa  fide,  lib.  iii.),  who,  however,  did  not, 
for  all  this,  conceive  Christ  as  a  mere  generic  being  typifyuig  mankind,  but  as  a  con- 
crete human  individual.  Comp.  Petavius,  De  incarnatione,  1.  v.  c.  5-8  (tom.  iv.  p. 
421  sqq.);  Doruer,  1.  c.  ii.  p.  202  ff. ;  and  J.  P.  Lange,  ChristHche  Dogmatik,  Part 

>  t-,j.  '       -  Even  in  the  scholastic  era  this  difficulty  was  felt.    Peter  the  Lombard  says 

^<j  '   (Sentent.  iii.  d.  5  d.):    N"on  accepit  Verbum  Dei  personam  hominis,  sed  naturam, 

fja  tL'  ^ff  quia  non  erat  ex  carne  ilia  una  composita  persona,  quam  Yerbum  accepit,  sed  accip- 
-  iendo  univit  et  uniendo  accepit.  E:  A  quibusdam  opponitiu-,  quod  persona 
assumpsit  personam.  Persona  enim  est  substantia  naturalis  individuse  natura;,  hoc 
autem  est  anima.  Ergo  si  animam  assiunpsit  et  personam.  Quod  ideo  non  sequitur, 
quia  anima  non  est  persona,  quaudo  ahi  rei  unita  est  personaliter,  sed  quando  per  se 
est.     Ilia  autem  anima  nunquam  fuit  quin  csset  alii  rei  conjuncta. 

^  The  Puritan  theologian,  John  Owen  (Works,  vol.  i.  p.  223),  says  of  the  human 
nature  of  Christ  quite  correctly,  and  in  agreement  with  the  Chalcedonian  Christolo- 


/^r- 


A 


/ 


§   142.      THE   ORTHODOX   CHBI8T0L0GT.  759 

8.  Criticism  and  develojpmeiit.  This  Clialcedonian  Chris- 
tology  has  latterly  been  subjected  to  a  rigorous  criticism,  and 
has  been  charged  now  with  dualism,  now  with  docetism,  ac- 
cording as  its  distinction  of  two  natures  or  its  doctrine  of  the 
impersonality  of  the  human  nature  has  most  struck  the  eye.' 

But  these  imputations  neutralize  each  other,  like  the  impu- 
tations   of    tri theism    and    modalism   which    may   be   made 

gy :  "  In  itself  it  is  awiroaTaros — that  which  hath  not  a  subsistence  of  its  own, 
which  should  give  it  individuation  and  distinction  from  the  same  nature  in  any  other 
person.  But  it  hath  Us  subsistence  in  the  person  of  the  Son,  which  thereby  is  its  own. 
The  divine  nature,  as  in  that  person,  is  its  supposUum." 

*  Dr.  Baur  (Geschichte  der  Trinitatslehre,  Bd.  L  p.  823  f )  imputes  to  the  Creed 
of  Chalcedon  "untenable  inconsistency,  equivocal  indefiniteness,  and  discordant  in- 
completeness," but  ascribes  to  it  the  merit  of  insistmg  upon  the  human  in  Christ  as 
having  equal  claims  with  the  divine,  and  of  thus  leaving  the  possibility  of  two  equal- 
ly legitimate  points  of  view.  Dr.  Dorner,  who  regards  the  Chalcedonian  statement 
as  premature  and  inadequate  (Geschichte  der  Christologie,  Bd.  ii.  pp.  83,  130), 
raises  against  it  the  double  objection  of  leaning  to  docetism  on  the  one  hand  and 
to  dualism  on  the  other.  He  sums  up  his  judgment  of  the  labors  of  the  ancient 
church  down  to  John  of  Damascus  in  the  sphere  of  Christology  in  the  following 
words  (ii.  2*73) :  "  If  we  review  the  result  of  the  Christological  speculation  of  the 
ancient  church,  it  is  undeniable  that  the  satisfying  and  final  result  cannot  be  found 
in  it,  great  as  its  traditional  influence  even  to  this  day  is.  It  mutilates  the  human 
nature,  inasmuch  as,  in  an  Apollinarian  way,  it  joins  to  the  trunk  of  a  human  nature 
the  head  of  the  divine  hypostasis,  and  thus  sacrifices  the  integrity  of  the  humanity 
to  the  unity  of  the  person.  Yet  after  all — and  this  is  only  the  converse  of  the  same 
fault — in  its  whole  doctrine  of  the  natures  and  the  will,  it  gives  the  divine  and  the 
human  only  an  outward  connection,  and  only,  as  it  were,  pushes  the  two  natures 
into  each  other,  without  modification  even  of  their  properties.  We  discover,  it  is 
true,  endeavors  after  something  better,  which  indicate  that  the  Christological  image 
hovering  before  the  mind,  has  not  yet,  with  aU  the  apparent  completeness  of  the 
theory,  found  its  adequate  expression.  But  these  endeavors  are  unfruitful."  Dr. 
W.  Beyschlag,  in  his  essay  before  the  German  Evangelische  Kirchentag  at  Alten- 
burg,  held  in  1864,  concurs  with  these  remarks,  and  says  of  the  Chalcedonian  dogma : 
"  Instead  of  starting  from  the  living  intuition  of  the  God-filled  humanity  of  Christ, 
it  proceeded  from  the  defective  and  abstract  concejjtion  of  two  separate  natures,  to 
be,  as  it  were,  added  together  in  Christ ;  introduced  thereby  an  irremediable  duahsm 
into  his  personal  life ;  and  at  the  same  time,  by  transferring  the  personality  wholly 
to  the  divine  nature,  depressed  the  humanity  which  in  ihesi  it  recognized,  to  a  mere 
unsubstantial  accident  of  the  Godhead,  at  bottoru  only  apparent  and  docetistic." 
But  Beyschlag  denies  the  real  personal  pre-existence  of  Christ  and  consequently  a 
proper  incarnation,  and  has  by  this  denial  caused  no  small  scandal  among  the 
beUeving  party  in  Germany.  Dorner  holds  firmly  to  the  pre-existence  and  incarna- 
tion, but  makes  the  latter  a  gradual  ethical  unification  of  the  Logos  and  the  human 
nature,  consummated  in  the  baptism  and  the  exaltation  of  Christ. 


760  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

against  the  orthodox  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  when  either  the 
tripersonality  or  the  consubstantiality  is  taken  alone.  This, 
indeed,  is  the  peculiar  excellence  of  the  creed  of  Chalcedon, 
that  it  exhibits  so  sure  a  tact  and  so  wise  a  circumspection  in 
uniting  the  colossal  antitheses  in  Christ,  and  seeks  to  do  justice 
alike  to  the  distinction  of  the  natures  and  to  the  unity  of  the 
person.*     In  Christ  all  contradictions  are  reconciled. 

"Within  these  limits  there  remains  indeed  ample  scope  for 
further  Christological  sj^eculations  on  the  possibility,  reality, 
and.  mode  of  the  incarnation  ;  on  its  relation  to  the  revela- 
tion of  God  and  the  development  of  man  ;  on  its  relation  to 
the  immutability  of  God  and.  the  trinity  of  essence  and  the 
trinity  of  revelation : — questions  which,  in  recent  times  espe- 
cially, have  been  earnestly  and  profoundly  discussed  by  the 
Protestant  theologians  of  Germany.* 

The  great  want,  in  the  present  state  of  the  Christological 

*  F.  R.  Hasse  (Kirchengeschichte,  i.  p.  Ill):  "By  the  Creed  of  Chalcedon 
justice  has  been  done  to  both  the  Alexandrian  and  th :;  Antiochian  Christology ;  the 
antagonism  of  the  two  is  adjusted,  and  in  the  dogma  of  the  one  S^fdu^puiTO!  done 
away." 

^  Witness  the  Christological  investigations  of  Schleiermachcr,  R.  Rothe,  Guschel, 
Dorner,  Liebner,  Lange,  Thomasius,  Martensen,  Gess,  Ebrard,  Schoberlein,  Plitt, 
Beyschlag,  and  others.  A  thorough  criticism  of  the  latest  theories  is  given  by 
Dorner,  in  his  large  work  on  Christology,  Bd.  ii.  p.  1260  S.  (Eng.  transl.  Div.  2d, 
vol.  iii.  p.  100  £F.),  and  in  several  dissertations  upon  the  immutability  of  God,  found 
in  his  Jahrbiicher  fiir  Deutsche  Theologie,  1856  and  1858;  also  by  Philippi,  Kirch- 
liche  Glaubenslehre,  iv.  i.  pp.  344-382;  Plitt,  Evangelische  Glaubenslehre  (1863), 
i.  p.  360  ff. ;  and  Woldemar  Schmidt,  Das  Dogma  vom  Gottmenschen,  mit  Beziehung 
auf  die  neusten  Losungsversuche  der  Gegensatze,  Leipzig,  1865.  The  English 
theology  has  contented  itself  with  the  traditional  acceptance  and  vindication  of  the 
old  CathoUc  doctrine  of  Christ's  person,  without  instituting  any  special  investiga- 
tions of  its  own,  while  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  has  been  thoroughly  reproduced 
and  vindicated  by  Cudworth,  Bull,  and  Waterland,  without,  however,  being  developed 
further.  Dr.  Shedd  also  considers  the  Chalcedonian  symbol  as  the  ne  plus  nltra  of 
Christological  knowledge,  "  beyond  which  it  is  probable  the  human  mind  is  unable 
to  go,  in  the  endeavor  to  xmfold  the  mystery  of  Christ's  complex  person,  which  in 
some  of  its  aspects  is  even  more  baffling  than  the  mystery  of  the  Trinity  "  (History 
of  Christian  Doctrine,  i.  p.  408).  This  is  probably  also  the  reason  why  this  work,  in 
surprising  contrast  with  every  other  History  of  Doctrine,  makes  no  mention  what- 
ever of  the  Monophysite,  Monothelite,  Adoptian,  Scholastic,  Lutheran,  Socinian, 
•  RationaUstic,  and  later  Evangelical  controversies  and  theories  respecting  this  cen- 
tral dogma  of  Christianity. 


§   142.      THE   ORTHODOX   CHKISTOLOGY.  761 

controversy,  is,  on  the  one  hand,  a  closer  discussion  of  the 
Pauline  idea  of  the  henosis,  the  self-limitation,  self-renuncia- 
tion of  the  Logos,  and  on  the  other  hand,  a  truly  human  por- 
trait of  Jesus  in  his  earthly  development  from  childhood  to 
the  full  maturity  of  manhood,  without  prejudice  to  his  deity, 
but  rather  showing  forth  his  absolute  uniqueness  and  sinless 
perfection  as  a  proof  of  his  Godhead.  Both  these  tasks  can 
and  should  be  so  performed,  that  the  enormous  labor  of 
deep  and  earnest  thought  in  the  ancient  church  be  not  con- 
demned as  a  sheer  waste  of  strength,  but  in  substance  con- 
firmed, expanded,  and  perfected. 

And  even  among  believing  Protestant  scholars,  who 
agree  in  the  main  views  of  the  theanthropic  glory  of  the 
person  of  Christ,  opinions  still  diverge.  Some  restrict  the 
Icenosis  to  the  laying  aside  of  the  divine  form  of  existence,  or 
divine  dignity  and  glory  ; '  others  strain  it  in  different  degrees, 
even  to  a  partial  or  entire  emptying  of  the  divine  essence  out 
of  himself,  so  that  the  inner  trinitarian  process  between  Father 
and  Son,  and  the  government  of  the  world  through  the  Son, 
were  partially  or  wholly  suspended  during  his  earthly  life.'^ 
Some,  again,  view  the  incarnation  as  an  instantaneous  act, 
consummated  in  the  miraculous  conception  and  nativity ; 
others  as  a  gradual  process,  an  ethical  unification  of  the  eter- 
nal Logos  and  the  man  Jesus  in  -  continuous  development,  so 
that  the  complete  God-Man  would  be  not  so  much  the  begin- 
ning as  the  consummation  of  the  earthly  life  of  Jesus. 

But  all  these  more  recent  inquiries,  earnest,  profound,  and 
valuable  as  they  are,  have  not  as  yet  led  to  any  important  or 
generally  accepted  results,  and  cannot  supersede  the  Chalce- 
donian  Christology.  The  theology  of  the  church  will  ever 
return  anew  to  deeper  and   still  deeper   contemplation   and 

*  Of  the  5o|a  &iov,  Jolm  xvii.  5  ;  the  ixopcpi)  ©eoD,  Phil.  ii.  6  ff. 

^  Among  these  modern  Kenotics,  W.  F.  Gess  goes  the  farthest  in  his  Lehre  von  i^ 
der  Person  Christi  (Basel,  1856).  Dorncr  opposes  the  theory  of  the  Kenotics  and  _^/- 
calls  them  Theopaschites  and  Patripassians  (ii.  126  ff.).  There  is,  however,  an 
essential  distinction,  inasmuch  as  the  ancient  Monophysite  Theopaschitism  reduces 
the  human  nature  of  Christ  to  a  mere  accident  of  his  Godhead,  while  Thomasius, 
Gess,  and  the  other  German  Kenotics  or  Kenosists  acknowledge  the  full  humanity 
of  Christ,  and  lay  great  stress  on  it.  *  \  ''^_ 


'l^  l-i< 


t 


^ 


762  THERD   PERIOD.   A.D.    311-590. 

adoration  of  the  tlieautliropic  person  of  Jesus  Christ,  which  is, 
and  ever  will  be,  the  sun  of  history,  the  miracle  of  miracles, 
the  central  mystery  of  godliness,  and  the  inexhaustible  foun- 
tain of  salvation  and  life  for  the  lost  race  of  man. 


§  143.     The  Mono])hysite  Controversies. 

I.  The  Acta  in  Mansi,  torn,  vii.-ix.     The  writings  ah-eady  cited  of  Libeea- 

Tus  and  Leontius  Byzant,  Evageits  :  H.  E.  ii.  v.  Nicephorus  : 
H.  E.  xvi.  25.  Procoeius  (t  about  552)  :  'AveK^ora,  Hist,  arcana  (ed. 
Orelli,  Lips.  1827).  Faotjndus  (bishop  of  Hermiane  in  Africa,  but 
residing  mostly  in  Constantinople)  :  Pro  defensione  trium  capitulorum, 
in  12  books  (written  a.  d,  547,  ed.  Sirmond,  Paris,  1629,  and  in  Gal- 
land,  xi.  6§5).  PulgentitjS  Eerraistdtts  (deacon  in  Carthage,  t  551) : 
Pro  tribus  capitulis  (in  Gall.  torn.  xi.).  Anastasius  Sinaita  (bishop 
of  Antioch,  564) :  'o57?yo'r  adv.  Acephalos.  Angelo  Mai  :  Script  vet. 
nova  collectio,  torn.  vii.  A  late,  though  unimportant,  contribution  to 
the  history  of  Monophysitism  (from  581  to  583)  is  the  Church  History 
of  the  Monophysite  bishop  Jonisr  of  Ephesus  (of  the  sixth  century) : 
.The  Third  Part  of  the  Eccles.  History  of  John,  bishop  of  Ephesus, 
Oxford,  1853  (edited  by  W.  Cureton  from  the  Syrian  literature  of  the 
Nitrian  convent). 

II.  Petavius:    De  Incarnatione,   lib.  i.  c.  16-18   (torn.  iv.  p.  74  sqq.). 

Walch:  Bd.  vi.-viii.  SoHRooKn:  Th.  xviii.  pp.  493-636.  Feander: 
Kirchengeschichte,  iv.  993-1038.  Gieseler:  i.  ii.  pp.  347-376  (4th 
ed.),  and  his  Commentatio  qua  Monophysitarum  veterum  vario3  de 
Christi  persona  opiuiones  .  .  .  illustrantur  (1835  and  1838).  Baue: 
Geschichte  der  Ti'initatslehre,  Bd.  ii.  pp.  37-96.  Doener:  Geschichte 
der  Christologie,  ii.  pp.  150-193.  Hefele  (R.  C):  Concilienge- 
schichte,  ii.  545  ff.  F.  Run.  Hasse:  Kirchengeschichte  (1864),  Bd.  i. 
p.  I77ff.  A.  Ebrard:  Handbuch  der  Kirchen- und  Dogmengeschichte 
(1865),  Bd.  i.  pp.  263-279. 

The  council  of  Chalcedon  did  not  accomplish  the  intended 
pacification  of  the  church,  and  in  Palestine  and  Egypt  it  met 
with  passionate  oj)position.  Like  the  council  of  Nicsea,  it 
must  pass  a  fiery  trial  of  conflict  before  it  could  be  universally 
acknowledged  in  the  church.  "  The^  metaphysical  difiiculty," 
says  Niedner,  "  and  the  religions  importance  of  the  problem, 
were  obstacles  to  the  acceptance  of  the  ecumenical  authority 
of  the  council."  Its  opponents,  it  is  true,  rejected  the  Euty- 
chian  theory  of  an  aT)sorption  of  the  human  nature  into  the 


§   143.      THE  MONOPHTSITE  CONTROVEESIES.  763 

divine,  but  nevertheless  held  firmly  to  the  doctrine  of  one 
nature  in  Christ ;  and  on  this  account,  from  the  time  of  the 
Chalcedonian  council  they  were  called  Monopliy sites ^  while 
they  in  return  stigmatized  the  adherents  of  the  council  as 
Dyophysites  and  Nestorians.  They  conceded,  indeed,  a  com- 
posite nature  ijila  <^yo-t9  cruf^ero?  or  yiia  (f)uaL^  Sltt?]),  but  not 
two  natures.  They  assumed  a  diversity  of  qualities  without 
corresponding  substances,  and  made  the  humanity  in  Christ  a 
mere  accident  of  the  immutable  divine  substance. 

Their  main  argument  against  Chalcedon  was,  that  the 
doctrine  of  two  natures  necessarily  led  to  that  of  two  persons, 
or  subjects,  and  thereby  severed  the  one  CJnist  into  two  Sons 
of  God.  They  were  entirely  at  one  with  the  Nestorians  in 
their  use  of  the  terms  "  nature  "  and  "person,"  and  m  reject- 
ing the  orthodox  distinction  between  the  two.  They  could  not 
conceive  of  human  nature  without  personality.  From  this 
the  Nestorians  reasoned  that,  because  in  Christ  there  are  two 
natures,  there  must  be  also  two  independent  hypostases ;  the 
Monophysites,  that,  because  there  is  but  one  person  in  Christ, 
there  can  be  only  one  nature.  They  regarded  the  nature  as  some- 
thing common  to  all  individuals  of  a  species  (kolvov),  yet  as  never 
existing  simply  as  such,  but  only  in  individuals.  According 
to  them,  therefore,  (J)v<tl<;  or  ovg-la  is  in  fact  always  an  individ- 
ual existence.^ 

The  liturgical  shibboleth  of  the  Monophysites  was :  God 
has  l)een  crucified.  This  t]iey  introduced  into  their  public 
worship  as  an  addition  to  the  Trisagion  :  "  Holy  God,  holy 
Mighty,  holy  Immortal,  who  hast  leeii  crucified  for  us,  have 
mercy  upon  us."  '  From  this  they  were  also  called  Theopas- 
chites.*  This  formula  is  in  itself  orthodox,  and  forms  the 
requisite  counterpart  to  SeoTOKo^,  provided  we  understand  by 
God  the  Logos,  and  in  thought  supply  :  "  according  to  the 

*  Ulouotpvalrat^  from  /xovr]  or  jula,  (pv(m.  They  conceded  the  e'/c  Sio  <pvaeaiv  (as 
even  Eutyches  and  Dioscurus  had  done),  but  denied  the  iv  5i5o  (pitjeaiv  after  the 
tvaiais. 

*  'IhlKOV. 

'  "Ayios  6  &ehs,  0710s  Ktrx^po^i  o-yios  a^dvaTos^  6  crravpu^ils  Si'  r^/J-us,  f\(r]crov 
Vfias.    An  extension  of  the  serapliic  ascription,  Isa.  vi.  3. 

*  Qeonacrx^Tat. 


764  THIRD  PEEIOD.   A.D.    311-590. 

flesh,"  or  "  according  to  tlie  human  nature."  In  this  qualified 
sense  it  was  afterwards  in  fact  not  only  sanctioned  hj  Justinian 
in  a  dogmatical  decree,  but  also  by  the  fifth  ecumenical  coun- 
cil, though  not  as  an  addition  to  the  Trisagion.  For  the  the- 
anthro-pic person  of  Christ  is  the  subject,  as  of  the  nativity,  so 
also  of  the  passion  ;  his  human  nature  is  the  seat  and  the  organ 
{senso7'iu7n)  of  the  passion.  But  as  an  addition  to  the  Trisagion, 
which  refers  to  the  Godhead  generally,  and  therefore  to  the 
Father,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  well  as  the  Son,  the  formula  is 
at  all  events  incongruous  and  equivocal.  Theopaschitism  is 
akin  to  the  earlier  Patripassianism,  in  subjecting  the  impassible 
divine  essence,  common  to  the  Father  and  the  Son,  to  the  pas- 
sion of  the  God-Man  on  the  cross  ;  yet  not,  like  that,  by  con- 
founding the  Son  with  the  Father,  but  by  confounding  person 
with  nature  in  the  Son. 

Thus  from  the  council  of  Chalcedon  started  those  violent 
and  complicated  Monophysite  controversies  which  convulsed 
the  Oriental  church,  from  patriarchs  and  emperors  down  to 
monks  and  peasants,  for  more  than  a  hundred  years,  and  which 
have  left  their  mark  even  to  om'  day.  They  brought  theology 
little  appreciable  gain,  and  piety  much  harm ;  and  they  pre- 
sent a  gloomy  picture  of  the  corruption  of  the  church.  The 
intense  concern  for  practical  religion,  which  animated  Athana- 
sius  and  the  Nicene  fathers,  abated  or  went  astray  ;  theological 
speculation  sank  towards  barren  metaphysical  refinements ; 
and  party  watchwords  and  empty  formulas  were  valued  more 
than  real  truth.  We  content  ourselves  with  but  a  summary 
of  this  wearisome,  though  not  unimportant  chapter  of  the  his- 
tory of  doctrines,  which  has  recently  received  new  light  from 
the  researches  of  Gieseler,  Baur,  and  Dorner.' 

The  external  history  of  the  controversy  is  a  history  of  out- 
rages and  intrigues,  depositions  and  banishments,  commotions, 
divisions,  and  attempted  reunions.  Immediately  after  the 
council  of  Chalcedon  bloody  fights  of  the  monks  and  the 
rabble  broke  out,  and  Monophysite  factions  went  ofi"  in  schis- 

'  The  external  history  of  Monophysitism  is  related  with  wearisome  minuteness 
by  Walch  in  three  large  volumes  (vi.-viii.)  of  his  Entwurf  einer  vollstiindigen  Histo- 
rie  der  Ketzereicn,  etc.,  bis  auf  die  Zeiten  der  Reformation. 


§    143.      THE   MONOPHYSITE   CONTEOVEESIES.  765 

matic  cliurclies.  In  Palestine  Theodosius  (451-453)  thus  set 
up  in  opposition  to  the  patriarch  Juvenal  of  Jerusalem  ;  in 
Alexandria,  Timotheus  iElurus  '  and  Peter  Mongus  ^  (454-460), 
in  opjDOsition  to  the  newly-elected  patriarch  Protarius,  who 
was  murdered  in  a  riot  in  Antioch  ;  Peter  the  Fuller  ^  (463-4Y0). 
After  thirty  years'  confusion  the  Monophysites  gained  a  tem- 
porary victory  under  the  protection  of  the  rude  pretender  to 
the  empire,  Basiliscus  (475-477),  who  in  an  encyclical  letter,* 
enjoined  on  all  bishops  to  condemn  the  council  of  Chalcedon 
(476).*  After  his  fall,  Zeno  (474-475  and  477-491),  by  advice 
of  the  patriarch  Acacius  of  Constantinople,  issued  the  famous 
formula  of  concord,  the  Henoticon,  which  proposed,  by  avoid- 
ing disputed  expressions,  and  condemning  both  Eutychianism 
and  Nestorianism  alike,  to  reconcile  the  monophysite  and  dy- 
ophysite  views,  and  tacitly  set  aside  the  Chalcedonian  formula 
(4S2).  But  this  was  soon  followed  by  two  more  schisms,  one 
among  the  Monophysites  themselves,  and  one  between  the  East 
and  the  "West.  Felix  II.,  bishop  of  Rome,  immediately  rejec- 
ted the  Henoticon,  and  renounced  communion  with  the  East 
(484-519).  The  strict  Monophysites  were  as  ill  content  with 
the  Henoticon,  as  the  adherents  of  the  council  of  Chalcedon ; 
and  while  the  former  revolted  from  their  patriarchs,  and 
became  Acephali,"  the  latter  attached  themselves  to  Pome.  It 
was  not  till  the  reign  of  the  emperor  Justin  I.  (518-527),  that 
the  authority  of  the  council  of  Chalcedon  was  established 
under  stress  of  a  popular  tumult,  and  peace  with  Pome  was 
restored.  The  Monophysite  bishops  were  now  deposed,  and 
fled  for  the  most  part  to  Alexandria,  where  their  party  was  too 
powerful  to  be  attacked. 

The  internal  divisions  of  the  Monophysites  turned  especially 
on  the  degree  of  essential  difference  between  the  humanity  of 
Christ  and  ordinary  human  nature,  and  the  degree,  therefore, 

^  AiXoupor,  Cat. 

^  Mo'77oy,  the  Stammerer;  literally,  the  Hoarse. 

^  Fullo,  'Yva(pivs.  He  introduced  the  formula:  ©ebs  laravpai^tiZi  v/jiai  into  the 
liturgy.     He  was  in  485  again  raised  to  the  patriarchate. 

*  'EyKVKKiof.  This,  however,  excited  so  much  opposition,  that  the  usurper  in 
ill  revoked  it  in  an  avTeyKVKXiov. 

^  'AKe(pa\oi,  without  head. 


766  THIED   PEEIOD,    A.D.    311-590. 

of  their  deviation  from  tlie  ortliodox  doctrine  of  the  full  con- 
substantiality  of  the  humanity  of  Christ  with  ours.*  The  most 
important  of  these  parties  were  the  Seveeians  (from  Severus, 
the  patriarch  of  Antioch)  or  Phthaetolatees  (adorers  of  the 
corruptible),*  who  taught  that  the  body  of  Christ  lefore  the 
resurrection  was  mortal  and  corruptible ;  and  the  Julianists 
(from  bishop  Julian  of  Halicaruassus,  and  his  contemporary 
Xenajas  of  Hierapolis)  or  Aphthaetodocet^/  who  affirmed 
the  body  of  Christ  to  have  been  originally  incorruptible,  and 
who  bordered  on  docetism.  The  former  conceded  %  the 
Catholics,  that  Christ  as  to  the  flesh  was  consubstantial  with  us 
{Kara  adpKa  ofioovcnos  rj^uv).  The  latter  argued  from  the  com- 
mingling {avyxvcrL<i)  of  the  two  natures,  that  the  corporeality 
of  Christ  became  from  the  very  beginning  partaker  of  tlie  in- 
corruptibleness  of  the  Logos,  and  was  subject  to  corruj^tible- 
ness  merely  kut  olicovofxiav.  They  appealed  in  particular  to 
Jesus'  walking  on  the  sea.  Both  parties  were  agreed  as  to  the 
incorruptibleness  of  the  body  of  Christ  after  the  resurrection. 
The  word  ^^opd^  it  may  be  remarked,  was  sometimes  used  in 
the  sense  of  frailty,  sometimes  in  that  of  corruptibleness. 

The  solution  of  this  not  wholly  idle  question  would  seem 
to  be,  that  the  body  of  Christ  before  the  resurrection  was 
similar  to  that  of  Adam  before  the  fall ;  that  is,  it  contained 
the  germ  of  immortality  and  incorruptibleness ;  but  before  its 
glorification  it  was  subject  to  the  influence  of  the  elements, 
was  destructible,  and  was  actually  put  to  death  by  external 
violence,  but,  through  the  indwelling  power  of  the  sinless 
spirit,  was  preserved  from  corruption,  and  raised  again  to  im- 
perishable life.     A  relative  immortality  thus  became  absolute.* 

*  Petavius,  L  c.  lib.  i.  c.  lY,  enumerates  twelve  factions  of  the  Monophysites. 

*  ^^apToXdrpai  (from  (pbaprSs,  corruptible,  and  Xdrp-qs,  servant,  worshipper), 
corrupticolae. 

^  'Acp^apToSoK^rat,  also  called  PHA^^ASIAST^,  because  they  appeared  to  acknow- 
ledge only  a  seeming  body  of  Christ.  Gieseler,  however,  in  the  second  part  of  the 
above-mentioned  dissertation,  has  shown  that  the  Julianist  view  was  not  strictly  docc- 
tistic,  but  kindred  with  the  view  of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origcn,  Hilary,  Gregory 
of  Nyssa,  and  ApoUinaris. 

*  Comp.  the  Augustinian  distinction  of  immortalitas  minor  and  immortalitas 
major. 


§   143.      THE   MONOPHTSITE   CONTKOVEESIES.  767 

So  far  we  may  without  self-contradiction  affirm  both  the  iden- 
tity of  the  body  of  Christ  before  and  after  his  resurrection,  and 
its  glorification  after  resurrection.' 

The  Severians  were  Eubdivided  again,  in  respect  to  the 
question  of  Christ's  omniscience,  into  Theodosians,  and  The- 
MisTiAxs,  or  Agnoet^.^  The  JuKanists  were  subdivided  into 
Ktistolate^,^  and  Aktistet^,^  according  as  they  asserted  or 
denied  that  the  body  of  Christ  ^ras  a  created  body.  The  most 
consistent  Monophysite  was  the  rhetorician  Stephanus  Niobes 
(about  550),  who  declared  every  attempt  to  distinguish  between 
the  divine  and  the  human  in  Christ  inadmissiblcj  since  they 
had  become  absolutely  one  in  him.^  An  abbot  of  Edessa,  Bar 
Sudaili,  extended  this  j)rinciple  even  to  the  creation,  which  he 
maintained  would  at  last  be  wholly  absorbed  in  God.  John 
Philoponus  (about  530)  increased  the  confusion ;  starting  with 
Monophysite  principles,  taking  ^ucrt?  in  a  concrete  instead  of  an 
abstract  sense,  and  identifying  it  with  inrSaracri^,  he  distin- 
guished in  God  thi'ee  individuals,  and  so  became  involved  in 
tritheism.  This  view  he  sought  to  justify  by  the  Aristotelian 
categories  of  genus,  species,  and  individuum.^ 

^  As  w£s  done  by  Augustine  and  Leo  the  Great.  The  latter  affirms,  Sermo  69, 
De  resurrectione  Domini,  c.  4 :  "  Resurrectio  Domini  non  finis  carnis,  sed  commutatio 
fuit,  nee  virtutis  augmento  consumpta  substantia  est.  Qualitas  transiit,  non  natura 
defecit;  et  factum  est  corpus  impassibile,  immortale,  incoiruptibile  .  .  .  nihil  re- 
mansit  in  came  Christi  infirmum,  ut  et  ipsa  sit  per  essentiam  et  non  sit  ipsa  per 
gloriam."  Comp.  moreover,  respecting  the  Aphthartodocetic  controversy  of  the 
Monophysites,  the  remarks  of  Dorner,  ii.  159  ff.  and  of  Ebrard,  Kirchen-  und 
Dogmengeschichte,  i.  268  f. 

^  After  their  leader  Themistius,  deacon  of  Alexandria;  also  called  by  their 
opponents,  Agxoet^,  'kyvorirai^  because  they  taught  that  Christ  in  his  condition  of 
humiliation  was  not  omniscient,  but  shared  our  ignorance  of  many  things  (comp. 
Luke  iL  52 ;  Mark  xiii.  32).  Tliis  view  leads  necessarily  to  dyophysitism,  and 
accordingly  was  rejected  by  the  strict  Monophysites. 

^  Kri(TTo\aTpai,  or,  from  their  founder,  Gajaxit^.  These  viewed  the  body  of 
Christ  as  created,  kti(tt6v, 

*  'AKTKTTTjTai.  ThcsB  Said  that  the  body  of  Christ  in  itself  was  created,  but  that 
by  its  union  with  the  Logos  it  became  increate,  and  therefore  also  incorruptible. 

*  His  adherents  were  condemned  by  the  other  Monophysites  as  Xiobit^. 

"  His  followers  wer&  called  Philoponiaci,  Tritheist^.  Philoponus,  it  may  be 
remarked,  was  not  the  first  promulgator  of  this  error ;  but  (as  appears  from  Assem. 
Bibl.  orient,  tom.  ii.  p.  327 ;  comp.  Hefele,  ii.  555)  the  Monophysite  John  Askus- 


768  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

§  144.     The  Three  Chapters,  and  the  Fifth  Ecumenical  Coun- 
cil, A.  D.  553. 

Comp.,  besides  the  literature  already  cited,  H.  N'oeis  (R.  0.) :  Historia 
Pelagiana  et  dissertatio  de  Synodo  Quinta  oecumen,  in  qua  Origenis  et 
Th.  Mopsuesteni  Pelagian!  erroris  auctorum  justa  damnatio,  et  Aquile- 
jense  scMsma  describitur,  etc.  Padua,  1673,  fol.,  and  Verona,  1729. 
John  Gaenter  (R.  0.):  Dissert,  de  V.  Synodo.  Paris,  1675  (against 
Card.  Noris).  Hefele  (R.  0.)  :  vol.  ii.  775-899.— The  Greek  Acta  of 
the  5th  council,  with  the  exception  of  the  14  anathemas  and  some 
fragments,  have  been  lost ;  but  there  is  extant  an  apparently  contem- 
porary Latin  translation  (in  Mansi,  torn.  ix.  163  sqq.),  respecting  whose 
-  genuineness  and  completeness  there  has  been  much  controversy  (comp. 
Hefele,  ii.  p.  831  ff.). 

The  further  fortunes  of  Mouophysitism  are  connected  with 
the  emperor  Justinian  I.  (527-565).  This  learned  and  un- 
weariedly  active  ruler,  ecclesiastically  devout,  but  vain  and 
ostentatious,  aspired,  during  his  long  and  in  some  respects 
brilliant  reign  of  nearly  thirty  years,  to  the  united  renown  of 
a  lawgiver  and  theologian,  a  conqueror  and  a  champion  of  the 
true  faith.  He  used  to  spend  whole  nights  in  prayer  and  fast- 
ing, and  in  theological  studies  and  discussions ;  he  placed  his 
throne  under  the  special  protection  of  the  Blessed  Yirgin  and 
the  archangel  Michael ;  in  his  famous  Code,  and  especially  in 
the  Kovelles,  he  confirmed  and  enlarged  the  privileges  of  the 
clergy ;  he  adorned  the  capital  and  the  provinces  with  costly 
temples  and  institutions  of  charity  ;  and  he  regarded  it  as  his 
especial  mission  to  reconcile  lieretics,  to  unite  all  parties  of 
the  church,  and  to  establish  the  genuine  orthodoxy  for  all 
time  to  come.  In  all  these  undertakings  he  fancied  himself 
the  chief  actor,  though  very  commonly  he  was  but  the  instru- 
ment of  the  empress,  or  of  the  court  theologians  and  eunuchs  ; 
and  his  efforts  to  compel  a  general  uniformity  only  increased 
the  divisions  in  church  and  state. 

Justinian  was  a  great  admirer  of  the  decrees  of  Chalcedon, 

nages,  who  ascribed  to  Christ  only  one  nature,  but  to  each  person  in  the  Godhead 
a  separate  nature,  and  on  this  account  was  banished  by  the  emperor  and  excommu- 
nicated by  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople.  Among  the  more  famous  Tritheists  we 
have  also  Stephen  Gobarus,  about  COO. 


§   144.      THE   THREE   CHAPTEES.  769 

and  ratified  tlie  four  ecmnemcal  councils  in  his  Code  of  Eonian 
law.  But  his  famous  wife  Theodora,  a  beautiful,  crafty,  and 
unscrupulous  woman,  whom  he — if  we  are  to  believe  the  re- 
po]"t  of  Procopius  ' — raised  from  low  rank,  and  even  from  a 
dissolute  life,  to  the  partnership  of  his  throne,  and  who,  as 
empress,  displayed  the  greatest  zeal  for  the  church  and  for 
ascetic  piet}",  was  secretly  devoted  to  the  Monophysite  view, 
and  fnistrated  all  his  plans.  She  brought  him  to  favor  the 
liturgical  formula  of  the  IVEonophy  sites :  "  God  was  crucified 
for  us,"  so  that  he  sanctioned  it  in  an  ecclesiastical  decree 
(533).= 

Through  her  influence  the  ITonophysite  Anthimus  was  made 
patriarch  of  Constantinople  (535),  and  the  characterless  Yigi- 
lius  bishop  of  Rome  (538),  under  the  secret  stipulation  that  he 
should  favor  the  Monophysite  doctrine.  The  former,  however, 
was  soon  deposed  as  a  Monophj-site  (536),  and  the  latter  did 
not  keep  his  promise.^  Meanwhile  the  Origenistie  controver- 
sies were  renewed.  The  emperor  was  persuaded,  on  the  one 
hand,  to  condemn  the  Origenistie  errors  in  a  letter  to  Mennas 
of  Constantinople  ;  on  the  other  hand,  to  condemn  by  an  edict 
the  Antiochian  teachers  most  odious  to  the  Monophysites  : 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  (the  teacher  of  ITestorius),  Theodoret 
of  Cyros,  and  Ibas  of  Edessa  (friends  of  Nestorius) ;  though 
the  last  two  had  been  expressly  declared  orthodox  by  the  coun- 
cil of  Chalcedon.  •  Theodore  he  condemned  absolutely,  but  Theo- 
doret only  as  respected  his  writings  against  Cyril  and  the  third 
ecumenical  council  at  Ephesus,  and  Ibas  as  respected  his  letter 
to  the  Persian  bishop  Maris,  in  which  he  complains  of  the 
outrages  of  Cyril's  party  in  Edessa,  and  denies  the  communica- 
tio  idiomatum.    These   ai-e  the  so-called  Three  Chajoters,  or 

^  Historia  Arcana,  c.  9. 

^  This  addition  remained  in  use  among  the  Catholics  in  Syria  till  it  was  thrown 
out  by  the  Concilium  Quinisextum  (can.  81).  Thenceforth  it  was  confined  to  the 
Monophysites  and  Monothelites.  The  opinion  gained  ground  among  the  Catholics, 
that  the  formula  taught  a  quaternity,  instead  of  a  trinity.     Gieseler,  i.  P.  ii.  p.  366  ff. 

^  Hefele  (ii.  p.  552)  thinks  that  Yigilius  was  never  a  llonophysite  at  heart,  and 
that  he  only  gave  the  promise  in  the  interest  of  "  his  craving  ambition."     The  mo- 
tive, however,  of  course  cannot  alter  the  fact,  nor  weaken  the  argument,  fumislied 
by  his  repeated  recantations,  against  the  claims  of  the  papal  see  to  infalUbility. 
VOL.  II. — 49 


770  THIRD   PEEIOD,    A.D.    311-590. 

formulas  of  condemnation,  or  rather  the  persons  and  writings 
designated  and  condemned  therein.' 

Thus  was  kindled  the  violent  controversy  of  the  Three 
Chapters^  of  which  it  has  been  said  that  it  has  filled  more 
volumes  than  it  was  worth  lines.  The  East  yielded  easily  to 
craft  and  force ;  the  West  resisted.''  Pontianus  of  Carthage 
declared  that  neither  the  emperor  nor  any  other  man  had  a 
right  to  sit  in  judgment  upon  the  dead.  Yigilius  of  Rome, 
however,  favored  either  party  according  to  circumstances,  and 
was  excommunicated  for  awhile  by  the  dyophysite  Africans, 
under  the  lead  of  Facundus  of  Hermiane.  He  subscribed 
the  condemnation  of  the  Three  Chapters  in  Constantinople,  a.  d. 
548,  but  refused  to  subscribe  the  second  edict  of  the  emperor 
against  the  Three  Chapters  (551),  and  afterwards  defended  them. 

To  put  an  end  to  this  controversy,  Justinian,  without  the 
concurrence  of  the  pope,  convoked  at  Constantinople,  a.  d.  553, 
the  Fifth  Ecumenical  Council,  which  consisted  of  a  hundred 
and  sixty-four  bishops,  and  held  eight  sessions,  from  the 
5th  of  May  to  the  2d  of  June,  under  the  presidency  of 
the  patriarch  Eutychius  of  Constantinople.  It  anathematized 
the  Three  Chapters ;  that  is,  the  jperson  of  Theodore  of  Mop- 
suestia,  the  anti-Cyrillian  writings  of  Theodoret,  and  the  letter 
of  Ibas,'  and  sanctioned  the  formula  "  God  was  crucified,"  or 
"  One  of  the  Trinity  has  suffered,"  yet  not  as  an  addition  to 
the  Trisagion/     The  dogmatic  decrees  of  Justinian  were  thus 

^  Tpiu  Ke(paA.aia,  tria  capitula.  "  Chapters"  are  properly  articles,  or  brief  propo- 
sitions, under  wliich  certain  errors  are  summed  up  in  the  form  of  anathemas.  The 
twelve  anathemas  of  Cyril  against  Nestorius  were  also  called  K€<pd\aia.  By  the 
Three  Chapters,  however,  are  to  be  understood  in  this  case :  1.  The  perso7i  and  writ' 
ings  of  Theodore  of  ilopsuestia ;  2.  the  anti-Cyrillian  writings  of  Theodoret ;  3.  the 
letter  of  Ibas  to  Maris.  Hence  the  appellation  impia  capitula,  acrfySi)  Ke^oXaia. 
This  deviation  from  ordinary  usage  has  occasioned  much  confusion. 

*  Especially  the  African  Fulgentius  Ferrandus,  Liberatus,  and  Facundus  of  Her- 
miane, who  -wrote  in  defence  of  the  Three  Chapters ;  also  the  Roman  deacon  Rusti- 
cus. 

'  These  anathemas  are  found  in  the  concluding  sentence  of  the  council  (Mansl, 
tom.  ix.  376):  "Praedicta  igitur  tria  capitula  anathematizamus,  id  est  Thcodorum 
impium  Mopsuestenum,  cum  nefandis  ejus  conscriptis,  et  quffi  impie  Theodoretus 
conscripsit,  et  impiam  epistolam,  qua;  dicitur  Ibte." 

*  Collect,  viii.  can.  10:  Elf  ns  ouk  &uo\oyu  rhu  ((Travpufievov  crdpKi  Kvpiov  rjuwy 


§    144.      THE   THREE   CIIArTEES.  771 

sanctioned  by  the  cliurcb.  But  no  further  mention  appears  to 
have  been  made  of  Origenism ;  and  in  truth  none  was  necessary, 
since  a  local  synod  of  5-i-i  had  abeady  condemned  it.  Perhaps 
also  Theodore  Askidas,  a  friend  of  the  Origenists,  and  one  of  the 
leaders  of  the  council,  prevented  the  ecumenical  condemnation 
of  Origen.  But  this  is  a  disputed  point,  and  is  connected  with 
the  difficult  question  of  the  genuineness  and  completeness  of 
the  Acts  of  the  council.' 

Vigilius  at  fii-st  protested  against  the  Council,  which,  in 
spite  of  repeated  invitations,  he  had  not  attended,  and  by 
which  he  was  suspended ;  but  he  afterwards  signified  his  adhe- 
rence, and  was  permitted,  after  seven  years'  absence,  to  return 
to  Eome,  but  died  on  the  journey,  at  Syracuse,  in  555.  His 
fourfold  change  of  opinion  does  j)oor  seiwice  to  the  claim  of 
papal  infallibility.  His  successor,  Pelagius  I.,  immediately  ac- 
knowledged the  council.  But  upon  this  the  chm'ches  in 
Northern  Italy,  Africa,  and  Illyria  separated  themselves  fi'om 
the  Roman  see,  and  remained  in  schism  till  Pope  Gregory  I. 
induced  most  of  the  Italian  bishops  to  acknowledge  the 
council. 

The  result  of  this  controversy,  therefore,  was  the  con- 
demnation of  the  Antiochian  theology,  and  the  partial  vic- 
tory of  the  Alexandrian  monophysite  doctrine,  so  far  as  it 
could  be  reconciled  with  the  definitions  of  Chalcedon.  But  the 
Chalcedonian  dyophysitism  afterwards  reacted,  in  the  form  of 
dyothelitism,  and  at  the  sixth  ecumenical  council,  at  Constan- 
tinople, A.  D.  680  (called  also  Concilium  Trullanum  I.),  under 
the  influence  of  a  letter  of  pope  Agatho,  which  reminds  us  of 

'l7\<Tovv  Xpiffrhu  eluai  Qehf  aXij-i luhi^  Ka\  nipiov  rris  5o'|7jy,  Kol  'iva  t^s  ayia^  rptdoo?,  6 
ToiovTos  ai/d^efia  ecTco.  "Whoever  does  not  acknowledge  that  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  who  was  crucified  in  the  flesh,  is  true  God  and  Lord  of  glory,  and  one  of  the 
Holy  Trinity,  let  him  be  anathema." 

*  In  the  11th  anathema,  it  is  true,  the  name  of  Origen  is  condemned  along  with 
other  heretics  (Arius,  Eunomius,  Macedonius,  Apollinaris,  Nestorius,  Eutyches),  but 
the  connection  is  incongruous,  and  the  name  is  regarded  by  Halloix,  Garnier,  Jacob 
Basnage,  Walch,  and  others,  as  an  interpolation.  Xoris  and  Hefele  (ii.  p.  874) 
maintain  its  genuineness.  At  all  events  the  fifteen  anathemas  against  Origen  do  not 
belong  to  it,  but  to  an  eariier  Constantinopolitan  synod,  held  in  544.  Comp.  Hefele, 
ii.  p.  768  ff. 


T72  THIED   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

the  Epistola  Dograatica  of  Leo,  it  gaiued  tlie  victory  over  the 
Monothelite  view,  which  so  far  involves  the  Monophysite,  as 
the  ethical  conception  of  one  will  depends  upon  the  physical 
conception  of  one  nature. 

But  notwithstanding  the  concessions  of  the  fifth  ecumenical 
council,  the  Monophysites  remained  separated  from  the  ortho- 
dox church,  refusing  to  acknowledge  in  any  manner  the  dyo- 
physite  council  of  Chalcedon.  Another  efibrt  of  Justinian  to 
gain  them,  by  sanctioning  the  Aphthartodocetic  doctrine  of  the 
incorruptibleness  of  Christ's  body  (564),  threatened  to  involve 
the  church  in  fresh  troubles ;  bat  his  death  soon  afterwards,  in 
565,  put  an  end  to  these  fruitless  and  despotic  plans  of  union. 
His  successor  Justin  II.  in  565  issued  an  edict  of  toleration, 
which  exhorted  all  Christians  to  glorify  the  Lord,  without  con- 
tending about  persons  and  syllables.  Since  that  time  the 
history  of  the  Monophysites  has  been  distinct  from  that  of  the 
cathoHc  church. 


§  145.     The  Monophysite  Sects :  Jacodites,  Copts,  Abyssinians, 
Armenians,  Maronites. 

ErsEB.  Eexatidot  (E.  C,  1 1720) :  Historia  patriarcbarum  Alexandrinorum 
Jacobitarum  a  D.  iilarco  usque  ad  finem  ssec.  xiii.  Par.  1713.  Also 
by  tbe  same;  Liturgiarum  orientalium  collectio.  Par.  1716,  2  vols. 
4to.  Jos.  Sim.  Assemazsti  (E.  C,  1 1768)  :  Bibliotbeca  orientalis.  Eom. 
1719  sqq.,  4  vols,  folio  (vol.  ii.  treats  De  scriptoribus  Syris  Monopby- 
sitis).  Michael  le  Quien  (E.  C-,  1 1733)  :  Oriens  Cbristianus.  Par. 
17-iO,  3  vols,  folio  (vols.  2  and  3).  Vetssieke  de  la  Ceoze  :  Histoire 
du  Christiamsme  d'Etbiope  et  d'Armenie.  La  Haye,  1739.  Gibbon: 
Cbapter  slvii.  towards  tbe  end.  Makeizi  (Mobammedau,  an  bistorian 
and  jurist  at  Cairo,  died  1441) :  Historia  Coptorum  Cbristiauorum 
(Arabic  and  Latin),  ed.  H.  J.  Wetter^  Sulzbacb,  1828;  a  better  edition 
by  F.  Wmtenfeld^  "n'itb  translation  and  annotations,  Guttingen,  1845^ 
J.  E.  T.  WiLTScn:  Kircblicbe  Statistik.  Berlin,  1846,  Bd.  i.  p.  225'ff.] 
JoHx  Mason  Neale  (Anglican) :  Tbe  Patriarchate  of  Alexandria. 
London,  1847,  2  vols.  Also  :  A  History  of  tbe  Holy  Eastern  Cburcb. 
Lond.  1850,  2  vols.  (vol.  ii.  contains  among  otber  tbings  tbe  Armenian 
and  Copto-Jacobite  Liturgy).  E.  DcLArEiER :  Histoire,  dograes,  tra- 
ditions, et  liturgie  de  I'Eglise  Armcniane.  Par.  1859.  Aethub  Pex- 
EHTN  Stanley  :  Lectures  on  tbe  Historv  of  tbe  Eastern  Cburcb.  New 


—j       igS^^yu^ ..  3t,  (ff^'uM  Ciu^A^^ .   '0,'ul^  /^4  /' 


§   145.      THE   MONOPHYSITE   SECTS.  T73 

York,  1862,  Lect.  i.  p.  92  ff./  Respecting  the  present  condition  of  the 
Jacobites,  Copts,  Armenians,  and  Maronites,  consult  also  works  of 
Eastern  travel,  and  the  numerous  accounts  in  missionary  magazines 
and  other  religious  periodicals. 

The  Monopliysites,  like  their  antagonists,  the  J^estorians, 
have  maintained  themselves  in  the  East  as  separate  sects  under 
their  own  bishops  and  patriarchs,  even  to  the  present  daj  ;  thus 
proving  the  tenacity  of  those  Christological  errors,  which 
acknowledge  the  full  Godhead  aad  manhood  of  Christ,  while 
those  errors  of  the  ancient  church,  which  deny  the  Godhead, 
or  the  manhood  (Ebionism,  Gnosticism,  Manichseisra,  Arian- 
ism,  etc.),  as  sects,  liave  long  since  vanished.  These  Christo- 
logical schismatics  stand,  as  if  enchanted,  upon  the  same  posi- 
tion which  they  assumed  in  the  fifth  century.  The  JSTestorians 
reject  the  third  ecumenical  council,  the  Monophysites  the 
fourth;  the  former  hold  the  distinction  of  two  natures  in 
Christ  even  to  abstract  separation,  the  latter  the  fusion  of  the 
two  natures  in  one  with  a  stubbornness  which  has  defied  cen- 
turies, and  forbids  their  return  to  the  bosom  of  the  orthodox 
Greek  church.  They  are  properly  the  ancient  national  churches 
of  Egypt,  Syria,  and  Armenia,  in  distinction  from  the  orthodox 
Greek  church,  and  the  united  or  Roman  church  of  the 
East. 

The  Monophysitcs  are  scattered  upon  the  mountains  and  in 
the  valleys  and  deserts  of  Syria,  Armenia,  Assyria,  Egypt,  and 
Abyssinia,  and,  like  the  orthodox  Greeks  of  those  countries, 
live  mostly  under  Mohammedan,  partly  under  Russian,  rule. 
They  supported  the  Arabs  and  Turks  in  weakening  and  at  last 
conquering  the  Byzantine  empire,  and  thus  furthered  the  ulti- 
mate victory  of  Islam.  In  return,  they  were  variously  favored 
by  the  conquerors,  and  upheld  in  their  separation  from  the 
Greek  church.  They  have  long  since  fallen  into  stagnation, 
ignorance,  and  superstition,  and  are  to  Christendom  as  a  pray- 
ing corpse  to  a  living  man.  They  are  isolated  fragments  of 
the  ancient  church  history,  and  curious  petrifactions  from  the 
Christological  battle-fields  of  the  fifth  and  sixth  centuries,  com- 
ing to  view  amidst  Mohammedan  scenes.  But  Providence  has 
preserved  them,  like  the  Jews,  and  doubtless  not  without  de- 


774:  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

sign,  tlirougli  storms  of  war  and  persecution,  unchanged  until 
the  present  time.  Their  very  hatred  of  the  orthodox  Greek 
church  makes  tliem  more  accessible  both  to  Protestant  and 
Koman  missions,  and  to  the  influences  of  "Western  Christianity 
and  Western  civilization. 

On  the  other  hand,  they  are  a  door  for  Protestantism  to 
the  Arabs  and  the  Turks ;  to  the  former  through  the  Jacob- 
ites, to  the  latter  through  the  Armenians.  There  is  the  more 
reason  to  hope  for  their  conversion,  because  the  Mohammedans 
despise  the  old  Oriental  churches,  and  must  be  won,  if  at  all, 
by  a  purer  type  of  Christianity,  In  this  respect  the  American 
missions  among  the  Armenians  in  the  Turkish  empire,  are,  like 
those  among  the  iJ^estorians  in  Persia,  of  great  prospective  im- 
portance, as  outposts  of  a  religion  which  is  destined  sooner  or 
later  to  regenerate  the  East. 

With  the  exception  of  the  Chalcedonian  Christology,  which 
they  reject  as  Nestorian  heresy,  most  of  the  doctrines,  institu- 
tions, and  rites  of  the  Monophysite  sects  are  common  to  them 
with  the  orthodox  Greek  church.  They  reject,  or  at  least  do 
not  recognize,  the  filioque  y  they  hold  to  the  mass,  or  the 
Eucharistic  sacrifice,  with  a  kind  of  transubstantiation ;  leav- 
ened bread  in  the  Lord's  Supper ;  baptismal  regeneration  by 
trine  immersion  ;  seven  sacraments  (yet  not  explicitl}',  since 
they  either  have  no  definite  term  for  sacrament,  or  no  settled 
conception  of  it) ;  the  patriarchal  polity ;  monasticism ;  pil- 
grimages, and  fasting  ;  the  requisition  of  a  single  marriage'  for 
j)riests  and  deacons  (bishops  are  not  allowed  to  marry) ; '  the 
prohibition  of  the  eating  of  blood  or  of  things  strangled.'^  On 
the  other  hand,  they  know  nothing  of  purgatory  and  indul- 
gences, and  have  a  simpler  worship  than  the  Greeks  and  Ro- 
mans. According  to  their  doctrine,  all  men  after  death  go 
into  Hades,  a  place  alike  without  sorrow  or  joy ;  after  the 
general  judgment  they  enter  into  heaven  or  are  cast  into  hell; 
and  meanwhile  the  intercessions  and  pious  works  of  the  living 

'  LajTuen  are  allowed  to  marry  twice,  but  a  third  marriage  is  regarded  as  forni- 
cation. 

^  Comp.  Acts  XV.  20.  Tlie  Latin  church  saw  in  this  ordinance  of  the  apostolic 
council  merely  a  temporary  measure  during  the  existence  of  Jewish  Christianity. 


§    145.      THE   MONOPHTSITE   SECTS.  775 

have  an  influence  on  the  final  destiny  of  the  departed.  Like 
the  ortliodox  Greeks,  they  honor  pictures  and  relics  of  the 
saints,  but  not  in  the  same  degree.  Scripture  and  tradition  are 
with  them  coordinate  sources  of  revelation  and  rules  of  faith. 
The  reading  of  the  Bible  is  not  forbidden,  but  is  limited  by  the 
ignorance  of  the  people  themselves.  They  use  in  worship  the 
ancient  vernacular  tongues,  which,  however,  are  now  dead 
lano-uao-es  to  them. 

There  are  four  branches  of  the  Monophysites :  the  Syrian 
Jacobites  ;  the  Copts,  including  the  Abyssinians  ;  the  Akme- 
NiANS  ;  and  the  less  ancient  Makoxites. 

I.  The  Jacobites  in  Syria,  Mesopotamia,  and  Babylonia. 
Their  name  comes  down  from  their  ecumenical '  metropolitan 
Jacob,  surnamed  Bakadai,  or  Zanzalus.''  This  remarkable 
man,  in  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century,  devoted  himself 
for  seven  and  thirty  years  (541-578),  with  unwearied  zeal  to 
the  interests  of  the  persecuted  Monophysites.  "  Light-footed 
as  Asahel," '  and  in  the  garb  of  a  beggar,  he  journeyed 
hither  and  thither  amid  the  greatest  dangers  and  privations ; 
revived  the  patriarchate  of  Antioch  ;  ordained  bishops,  priests, 
and  deacons ;  organized  churches ;  healed  divisions ;  and 
thus  saved  the  Monophysite  body  from  impending  extinc- 
tion. 

The  patriarch  bears  the  title  of  patriarch  of  Antioch,  be- 
cause the  succession  is  traced  back  to  Severus  of  Antioch  ;  but 
he  commonly  resides  in  Diarbekir,  or  other  towns  or  monaste- 
ries. Since  the  fourteenth  century,  the  patriarch  has  always 
borne  the  name  Ignatius,  after  the  famous  martyr  and  bishop 
of  Antioch.  The  Jacobite  monks  are  noted  for  gross  supersti- 
tion and  rigorous  asceticism.  A  part  of  the  Jacobites  have 
united  with  the   church   of  Rome.     Lately  some  Protestant 

'  Ecumenical,  i.  e.,  not  restricted  to  any  particular  province. 

^  From  his  beggarly  clothing.  Baradai  signifies  in  Arabic  and  Syriac  horse 
blanket,  of  coarse  cloth,  and  TCdv(a\ov  is  vile  aliquid  et  triticm  (see  Kodiger  in  Her- 
zog's  Encycl.  vi.  401). 

'  2  Sam.  ii.  18. 


776  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

missionaries  from  America  have  also  found  entrance  among 
them. 

II.  The  Copts/  in  Egypt,  are  in  nationality  the  genuine 
descendants  of  the  ancient  Egyptians,  though  with  an  admix- 
ture of  Greek  and  Arab  blood.  Soon  after  the  council  of 
Chalcedon,  they  chose  Timotheus  ^lurus  in  opposition  to  the 
patriarch  Proterius.  After  varying  fortunes,  they  have,  since 
536,  had  their  own  patriarch  of  Alexandria,  who,  like  most 
of  the  Egyptian  dignitaries,  commonly  resides  at  Cairo.  He 
accounts  himself  the  true  successor  of  the  evangelist  Mark,  St. 
Athanasius,  and  Cyril.  He  is  always  chosen  from  among  the 
monks,  and,  in  rigid  adherence  to  the  traditionary  nolo  e/pisco- 
jpari^  he  is  elected  against  his  will ;  he  is  obliged  to  lead  a 
strict  ascetic  life,  and  at  night  is  waked  every  quarter  of  an 
hour  for  a  short  prayer.  He  alone  has  the  power  to  ordain, 
and  he  performs  this  function  not  by  imposition  of  hands,  but 
by  breathing  on  and  anointing  the  candidate.  His  jurisdic- 
tion extends  over  the  churches  of  Egypt,  ISTubia,  and  Abyssin- 
ia, or  Ethiopia.  He  chooses  and  anoints  the  Abuna  (i.  e.,  Our 
Father),  or  patriarch  for  Abyssinia.  Under  him  are  twelve 
bishops,  some  with  real  jurisdiction,  some  titular;  and  under 
these  again  other  clergy,  down  to  readers  and  exorcists.  There 
are  still  extant  two  incomplete  Coptic  versions  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, the  Upper  Egyptian  or  Thebaic,  called  also,  after  the 
Arabic  name  of  the  province,  the  Sahidic,  i.  e..  Highland  ver- 
sion ;  and  the  Lower  Egyptian  or  Memphitic.^ 

The  Copts  were  much  more  numerous  than  the  Catholics, 
whom  they  scoffingly  nicknamed  MelcTiites^  or  Ccesar-Chris- 
tians.  They  lived  with  them  on  terms  of  deadly  enmity,  and 
facilitated  the  conquest  of  Egypt  by  the  Saracens  (641).  But 
they  were  afterwards  cruelly  persecuted  by  these  very  Sara- 

'  rrom  aiyv-KTos,  Guptos,  and  not,  as  some  suppose,  from  the  town  Koptos,  nor 
from  an  abbreviation  of  Jacobite.  They  are  the  most  ancient,  but  Christian  Egyp- 
tians, in  distinction  from  the  Pharaonic  (Chem),  those  of  the  Old  Testament  (Mizrim), 
the  Macedonian  or  Greek  {aij.\  and  the  modern  Arab  Egyptians  (Misr). 

^  Of  this  latter  H.  Tattam  and  P.  Botticher  (1852)  have  lately  published  consid- 
erable fragments. 

^  From  the  Hebrew  melech,  king. 


§   145.      THE   MONOPHTSITE   SECTS.  TY7 

cens,'  and  dwindled  from  some  two  millions  of  souls  to  a  hun- 
dred and  fifty  or  two  hundred  thousand,  of  whom  about  ten 
thousand,  or  according  to  others  from  thirty  to  sixty  thousand, 
live  in  Cairo,  and  the  rest  mostly  in  Upper  Egypt.  They  now, 
in  common  with  all  other  religious  sects,  enjoy  toleration. 
They  and  the  Abyssinians  are  distinguished  from  tlie  other 
Monophy sites  by  the  Jewish  and  Mohammedan  practice  of 
circumcision,  which  is  performed  by  lay  persons  (on  both  sexes), 
and  in  Egypt  is  grounded  upon  sanitary  considerations.  They 
still  observe  the  Jewish  law  of  meats.  They  are  sunk  in  pov- 
erty, ignorance,  and  semi-barbarism.  Even  the  clergy,  who 
indeed  are  taken  from  the  lowest  class  of  the  people,  are  a 
beggarly  set,  and  understand  nothing  but  how  to  read  mass, 
and  perform  the  various  ceremonies.  They  do  not  even  know 
the  Coptic  or  old  Egyptian,  their  own  ancient  ecclesiastical 
language.  They  live  by  farming,  and  their  official  fees.  The 
literary  treasures  of  their  convents  in  the  Coptic,  Syriac,  and 
Arabic  languages,  have  been  of  late  secured  for  the  most  part 
to  the  British  Museum,  by  Tattam  and  other  travellers. 

Missions  have  lately  been  undertaken  among  them,  espe- 
cially by  the  Church  Missionary  Society  of  England  (commen- 
cing in  1825),  and  the  United  Presbyterians  of  America,  but 
with  little  success  so  far.'' 

The  Abyssinian  chm'ch  is  a  daughter  of  the  Coptic,  and 
was  founded  in  the  fourth  century  by  two  missionaries  from 
Alexandria,  Frumentius  and  Aedesius.  It  presents  a  strange 
mixture  of  barbarism,  ignorance,  superstition,  and  Christianity. 

'  So  that  even  their  Arabic  historian  Makrlzi  was  moved  to  compassion  for 
them. 

'  A  detailed,  but  very  unfavorable  description  of  the  Copts  is  given  by  Edward 
W.  Lane  in  his  "  Manners  and  Customs  of  the  Modern  Egyptians,"  1833.  Notwith- 
standing this  they  stand  higher  than  the  other  Egyptians.  A.  P.  Stanley  (Hist,  of 
the  Ea.stern  Church,  p.  95)  says  of  them:  "The  Copts  are  still,  even  in  their  de- 
graded state,  the  most  civilized  of  the  natives :  the  intelligence  of  Eg.vpt  still  lingers 
in  the  Coptic  scribes,  who  are  on  this  account  used  as  clerks  in  the  offices  of  their 
conquerors,  or  as  registrars  of  the  water-marks  of  the  Nile."  Comp.  also  the  occa- 
sional notices  of  the  Copts  in  the  Egyptological  writings  of  Wilkinson,  Bunsen,  Lep- 
sius,  Brugsch,  and  others. 


778  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Its  EtliIoi3ic  Bible,  wliicli  dates  perhaps  from  tlie  fii'st  missiona- 
ries, includes  in  the  Old  Testament  the  apoci-yphal  book  of 
Enoch.  The  Chronicles  of  Axuma  (the  former  capital  of  the 
country),  dating  from  the  fourth  century,  receive  almost  the 
same  honor  as  the  Bible.  The  council  of  Chalcedon  )• 
accounted  an  assembly  of  fools  and  heretics.  The  Abyssinia, 
church  has  retained  even  more  Jewish  elements  than  the 
Coptic.  It  observes  the  Jewish  Sabbath  together  with  the 
Christian  Sunday  ;  it  forbids  the  use  of  the  flesh  of  swine  and 
other  unclean  beasts ;  it  celebrates  a  yearly  feast  of  general 
lustration  or  rebaptizing  of  the  whole  nation ;  it  retains  the 
model  of  a  sacred  ark,  called  the  ark  of  Zion,  to  which  gifts 
and  prayers  are  offered,  and  which  forms  the  central  point  of 
public  worship.  It  believes  in  the  magical  virtue  of  outward 
ceremonies,  especially  immersion,  as  the  true  regeneration. 
Singularly  enough  it  honors  Pontius  Pilate  as  a  saint,  because 
he  washed  his  hands  of  innocent  blood.  The  endless  contro- 
versies respecting  the  natures  of  Christ,  wliich  have  died  out 
elsew^here,  still  rage  there.  The  Abyssinians  honor  saints  and 
pictures,  but  not  images ;  crosses,  but  not  the  crucifix.  Every 
priest  carries  a  cross  in  his  hand,  and  presents  it  to  every  one 
whom  he  meets,  to  be  kissed.  The  numerous  churches  are 
small  and  dome-shaped  above,  and  covered  with  reeds  and 
straw.  On  the  floor  lie  a  number  of  staves  and  crutches,  on 
which  the  peoj^le  support  themselves  during  the  long  service, 
as,  like  all  the  Orientals,  they  are  without  benches.  Slight  as 
are  its  remains  of  Christianity,  Abyssinia  still  stands,  in  agri- 
culture, arts,  laws,  and  social  condition,  far  above  the  heathen 
countries  of  Afi'ica — a  proof  that  even  a  barbaric  Christianity 
is  better  than  none. 

The  influences  of  the  West  have  penetrated  even  to  Abys- 
sinia. The  missions  of  the  Jesuits  in  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries,  and  of  the  Protestants  in  the  nineteenth, 
have  been  prosecuted  amidst  many  dangers  and  much  self-de- 
nial, yet  hitherto  with  but  little  success.' 

'  Especially  worthy  of  note  are  the  labors  of  the  Basle  missionaries,  Samuel 
Gobat  (now  Anglican  bishop  in  Jerusalem),  Kugler,  Isenlserg,  Blumhardt,  and 
Krapf  smee  1830.     Comp.  Gobat  in  the  Easier  Missionsmagazm  for  18o4,  Part  1 


/f-^  ,^%^^-.-,  £jf^<^  ^^cu  t^tv./^ 


I 


§   145.      THE   MONOPHYSITE   SECTS.  779 

III.  The  Armenians.  These  are  the  most  numerous,  inter- 
esting, and  hopeful  of  the  Mouophysite  sects,  and  now  the 
most  accessible  to  evangelical  Protestantism.  Their  nationali- 
ty reaches  back  into  hoary  antiqiiity,  like  Mount  Ararat,  at 
whose  base  lies  their  original  home.  They  were  converted  to 
Christianity  in  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century,  under  King 
Tiridates,  by  Gregory  the  Enliglitener,  the  first  patriarch  and 
ecclesiastical  writer  and  the  greatest  saint  of  the  Armenians.' 
They  were  provided  by  iiim  wath  monasteries  and  seminaries, 
and  afterwards  by  Mesrob  "^  with  a  version  of  the  Scriptures, 
made  from  the  Greek  with  the  help  of  the  Syriac  Peschito ; 
which  at  the  same  time  marks  the  beginning  of  the  Armenian 
literature,  since  Mesrob  had  first  to  invent  his  alphabet.  The 
Armenian  canon~^iLas_fcair4*o©ks-^ound  i&  ik>  other  4>ible;  -hi 
the- OM  -Xestanient,  the  Hiatery  of  Joseph  and  Asenath,  and 
the  T£stament  of  the  twelve  Patriarchs,  and  in  the  New,  the 
Epistle  of  the  Corintliians  to  Pftul -and  a  Third,  but  spurious. 
Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Corinthians.  The  next  oldest  work  in 
the  Armenian  language  is  the  history  of  their  land  and  peo- 
ple, by  Moses  Chorenensis,  a  half  century  later. 

The  Armenians  fell  away  from  the  church  of  the  Greek 


and  2.  Isenberg:  Abyssinien  und  die  evangelische  Mission,  Bonn,  1844,  2  Bde. 
and  Isenberg  and  Krapf:  Journals,  1843.  Also  Harris:  Highlands  of  Ethiopia, 
1844.  The  imported  fragments  of  an  Abyssinian  translation  of  the  Bible,  dating 
from  the  fourth  or  fifth  century,  have  drawn  the  attention  of  Western  scholars.  Prof, 
A.  Dillmann  (now  in  Giessen)  has  since  1854  pubhshed  the  ^thiopic  Old  Testament, 
a  grammar,  and  a  lexicon  of  the  .iEthiopic  language.  Of  the  older  works  on  Abys- 
sinia the  principal  are  Lcdolphcs:  Historia  -iEthiopica,  Frankf.  1681;  Geddes: 
Church  History  of  ^Ethiopia,  Lond.  1696,  and  La  Croze  :  Histoire  du  Christianisme 
d'Ethiopie  et  d'Armenie,  La  Haye,  1739.  They  have  all  drawn  their  principal 
materials  from  the  Jesuits,  especially  from  the  general  history  of  Tellez,  published 
1660. 

'  ^ajTKTTTjs,  Illuminator.  He  was  married  and  had  several  sons.  He  was 
urgently  invited  to  the  Xicene  council,  but  sent  his  son  Aristax  in  his  stead,  to  whom 
he  resigned  his  office,  and  then  withdrew  himself  for  the  rest  of  his  life  into  a  moun- 
tain-cave. There  are  homiUes  of  his  still  extant,  which  were  first  printed  in  1737  in 
Constantinople.^^ 

^  Called  Mesrop,  Mjesrob,  Mjesrop,  and  llarchtoz.  Comp.  respecting  this  man 
and  the  origin  of  the  Armenian  version  of  the  Bible,  the  chronicle  of  his  pupil, 
Moses  Chorenensis,  and  the  article  by  Petermann  in  Herzog's  Encycl.  Bd.  Lx.  n, 
370  ff. 


780  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Empire  in  652,  from  wliicli  year  they  date  their  era.  The  Per- 
sians favored  the  separation  on  political  grounds,  bnt  were  them- 
selves thoroughly  hostile  to  Christianity,  and  endeavored  to  in- 
troduce the  Zoroastrian  religion  into  Armenia.  The  Armenian 
church,  being  left  unrepresented  at  the  council  of  Chalcedon 
through  the  accidental  absence  of  its  bishops,  accepted  in  491  the 
Henoticon  of  the  emperor  Zeno,  and  at  the  synod  of  Twin  (Tevin 
or  Tovin,  the  capital  at  that  time),  held  a.  d.  595,  declared  de- 
cidedly for  the  Monophysite  doctrine.  The  Confessio  Ar- 
menica,  which  in  other  respects  closely  resembles  the  Nicene 
Creed,  is  recited  by  the  priest  at  every  morning  service.  The 
Armenian  church  had  for  a  long  time  only  one  patriarcli  or 
Catholicus,  who  at  first  resided  in  Sebaste,  and  afterwards  in 
the  monastery  of  Etschmiezin  (Edschmiadsin),  their  holy  city, 
at  the  foot  of  Momit  Ararat,  near  Erivan  (now  ^belonging  to 
Kussia),  and  had  forty-two  archbishops  under  him.  At  his 
consecration  the  dead  hand  of  Gregory  the  Enlightener  is 
even  yet  always  used,  as  the  medium  of  tactual  succession. 
Afterwards  other  patriarchal  sees  were  established,  at  Jerusa- 
lem (in  1311),  at  Sis,  in  Cilicia  (in  IMO),  and  after  the  fall  of 
the  Greek  empire  in  Constantinople  (1461).^  In  637  Armenia 
fell  under  Mohammedan  dominion,  and  belongs  now  partly  to 
Turkey  and  partly  to  Eussia.  But  the  varying  fortunes  and 
frequent  oppressions  of  their  country  have  driven  many  thou- 
sands of  the  Armenians  abroad,  and  they  are  now  scattered  in 
other  parts  of  Russia  and  Turkey,  as  well  as  in  Persia,  India, 
and  Austria. 

The  Armenians  of  the  diaspora  are  mostly  successful 
traders  and  brokers,  and  have  become  a  nation  and  a  church 
of  merchant  princes,  holding  great  influence  in  Turkey.  Their 
dispersion,  and  love  of  trade,  their  lack  of  political  independ- 
ence, their  tenacious  adherence  to  ancient  national  customs 
and  rites,  the  oppressions  to  which  they  are  exposed  in  foreign 
countries,  and  the  influence  which  they  nevertheless  exei'cise 
upon  these  countries,  make  their  position  in  the  Orient,  cspe- 

*  Respecting  the  patriarchal  and  metropolitan  sees  and  the  bishoprics  of  the 
Armenians,  comp.  Le  Quien,  torn,  i.,  and  Wiltsch,  Kirchliche  Geographic  uud  Sta- 
tistik,  ii.  p.  375  flF. 


§    145.      THE  MONOPHTSITE   SECTS.  781 

cially  in  Turkey,  similar  to  that  of  the  Jews  in  the  Christian 
world. 

The  whole  number  of  the  Armenians  is  very  variously  esti-  n^     j*W- 

mated,  from  two  and  a  half  up  to  fifteen  millions;*  >^^  ou^<^  /i;ocT^«/<r^ 

The  Armenian  church,  it  may  be  remarked,  has  long  been   '    fUl^  .^9fi*K 
divided  into  two  parts,  which,  although  internally  very  similar,         ^^         '■'. 
are  inflexibly  opposed  to  each  other.     The  'M?^^V6(i^  Armenians," ' 
since  the  council  of  Florence,  a.d,  1439,  have  been  connected  *;^bi^j  -    '      V; 
with  the  church  of  Rome.    To  them  belongs  the  congi-egation  of    ^u  #V 
the  Mechitarists,  which  was  founded  by  the  Abbot  Mechitar  ;^  i*-*/  tZ.  ^f 
(tl749),  and  possesses  a  famous  monastery  on  the  island  of /-^  Ji  '».*• 
San  Lazzaro  near  Yenice,  from  which  centre  it  has  successfully  ^   •  ;'* 
labored  since  1702  for  Armenian  literature  and  education  in 
the  interest  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church.'^     The  scMsmatical  -^        "'" 

Annenians  hold  firmly  to  theii"  peculiar  ancient  doctrines  and      ■    ■  •  •'  Z "■ .  ^ 
polity.     They  regard  themselves  as  the  orthodox,  and  call  the    f^^^^  '^ 
united  or  Roman  Armenians  schismatics.  ":  ^j%^<^  . 

Since  1830,  the  Protestant  Missionary,  Tract,  and  Bible  socie- 
ties of  England,  Basle,  and  the  United  States,  have  labored  among 
the  Armenians,  especially  among  the  Monophysite  portion, 
with  great  success.  The  American  Board  of  Commissioners 
for  Foreign  Missions,'  in  particular,  has  distributed  Bibles  and 
rehgious  books  in  the  Armenian  and  Armeno-Turkish  *  lan- 
guage, and  founded  flourishing  churches  and  schools  in  Con- 
stantinople, Broosa,  ISTicomedia,  Trebizond,  Erzroom,  Aintab, 
Khai-poot,  Diarbekir,  and  elsewhere.  Several  of  these  churches 
have  already  endured  the  crucial  test  of  persecution,  and  jus- 


&- 


^  Stanley  (History  of  the  Eastern  Church,  p.  92),  supported  by  Xeale  and  Haxt- 
hausen  (Transcaucasia),  estimates  the  number  of  the  Armenians  at  over  eight  mil- 
lions.   But  Dr.  G.  W.  Wood,  of  New  York,  formerly  a  missionary  among  them,  in- 
forms me  that  their  total  number  probably  does  not  exceed  six  miUions,  of  whom  ^ 
about  two  and  a  half  millions  are  probably  in  Turkey.  V  _      .---•'•— -■->♦      ^^___^^^  '^  V '" 

'  Comp.  C.F.  Neumann:  Geschichte  der  armenischen  Literatur  nach  den  Wer-N      \       — '^^ft 
ken  der  Mechitaristen,  Leipzig,  1836.     The  chief  work  of  the  Mechitarists  is  the  r'""'*^  y  *^  /^v 
history  of  Armenia,  by  P.  Michael  Tschamtschean  (f  1823),  in  three  vols.,  Yenice,  . '  (.-aiV  A*  9  P^^ 

This  oldest  and  most  extensive  of  American  missionary  societies  was  founded  |     ^i^J^ 
A.  D.  1810,  and  is  principally  supported  by  the  Congregationalists  and  New  School]       .r  •       •  / 

Presbyterians.  pj  /.^^-W*^** 

The  Armeno-Turkish  is  the  Turkish  language  written  in  Armenian  characters.  {     ^a  jtnA**  > 


c-^ 


782  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

tify  bright  hopes  for  the  future.  As  the  Jewish  synagogues 
of  the  diaspora  were  witnesses  for  monotheism  among  idola- 
ters, and  preparatory  schools  of  Christianity,  so  are  these 
Protestant  Armenian  churches,  as  well  as  the  Protestant 
Nestorian,  outposts  of  evangelical  civilization  in  the  East,  and 
perhaps  the  beginning  of  a  resurrection  of  primitive  Christian- 
ity in  the  lands  of  the  Bible,  and  harbingers  of  the  future 
conversion  of  the  Mohammedans.' 

IV.  The  youngest  sect  of  the  Monophysites,  and  the  solitary 
memorial  of  the  Monothelite  controversy,  are  the  Makonites, 
so  called  from  St.  Maron,  and  the  eminent  monastery  founded 
by  him  in  Syria  (400).''  They  inhabit  the  range  of  Lebanon, 
with  its  declivities  and  valleys,  from  Tripolis  on  the  North  to 
the  neighborhood  of  Tyre  and  the  lake  of  Gennesaret  on  the 
South,  and  amount  at  most  to  half  a  million.  They  have  also 
small  churches  in  Aleppo,  Damascus,  and  other  places.  They 
are  pure  Syrians,  and  still  use  the  Syriac  language  in  their 
liturgy,  but  speak  Arabic.  They  are  subject  to  a  patriarch, 
who  commonly  resides  in  the  monastery  of  Kanobin  on  Mt. 
Lebanon.  They  were  originally  Monothelites,  even  after  the 
doctrine  of  one  will  of  Christ,  which  is  the  ethical  complement 
of  the  doctrine  of  one  nature,  had  been  rejected  at  the  sixth 
ecumenical  council  (a.  d.  680).  But  after  the  Crusades  (1182), 
and  especially  after  1596,  they  began  to  go  over  to  the  Roman 

^  Compare,  respecting  the  Armenian  mission  of  the  American  Board,  the  pub- 
lications of  this  Society ;  Eli  Smith  and  H.  G.  0.  Dwight  :  Missionary  Researches  in 
Armenia,  Boston,  1833;  Dr.  H,  G.  0.  Dwight:  Christianity  revived  in  the  East, 
New  York,  1850;  H.  Newcomb:  Cyclopaedia  of  Missions,  pp.  124-154.  The  prin- 
cipal missionaries  among  the  Armenians  are  H.  G.  0.  Dwight,  W,  Goodell,  C.  Ham- 
lin, G.  W.  Wood,  E.  Riggs,  D.  Ladd,  P.  0.  Powers,  W.  G.  Schauffler  (a  Wiirtem- 
berger,  but  educated  at  the  Theol.  Seminary  of  Andover,  Mass.),  and  Benj.  Schnei- 
der (a  German  from  Pennsylvania,  but  likewise  a  graduate  of  Andover). 

*  He  is  probably  the  same  Maron  whose  Hfe  Theodoret  wrote,  and  to  whom 
Chrysostom  addressed  a  letter  when  in  exile.  He  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  the 
later  John  Maron,  of  the  seventh  century,  who,  according  to  the  legendary  traditions 
of  the  Catholic  Maronites,  acting  as  papal  legate  at  Antioch,  converted  the  whole  of 
Lebanon  to  the  Roman  church,  and  became  their  first  patriarch.  The  name 
"Maronites"  occurs  first  in  the  eighth  century,  and  that  as  a  name  of  heretics,  in 
John  of  Damascus. 


WOEKS   ON   THE   PELAGIAN   COlTrEOVEESY   IN   GENERAL.      783 

cliurcb,  althougli  retaining  the  communion  under  both  kinds, 
their  Syriac  missal,  the  marriage  of  priests,  and  their  tradi- 
tional fast-days,  with  some  saints  of  their  own,  especially  St. 
Maron. 

From  these  came,  in  the  eighteenth  century,  the  three  cele- 
brated Oriental  scholars,  the  Assemani,  Joseph  Simon  (f  1768), 
his  brother  Joseph  Aloysius,  and  their  cousin  Stephen  Evodius. 
These  were  born  on  Mt.  Lebanon,  and  educated  at  the  Ma- 
rouite  college  at  Eome. 

There  are  also  Maronites  in  Syria,  who  abhor  the  Eoman 
church.^ 

lY.  The  Anthkopological  Controveksies. 

WORKS   0^  THE  PELAGIAX   COXTROYERSY  IX  GENERAL. 

SOURCES : 

I.  Pelagitts:  Expositiones  in  epistolas  Paulinas  (composed  before  410); 

Epistola  ad  Demetriadem,  in  30  chapters  (written  a.  d.  413) ;  Libellus 
fidei  ad  Innocentium  I.  (417,  also  falsely  called  Explanatio  Symboli  ad 
Damasum).  These  three  works  have  been  preserved  complete,  as 
supposed  works  of  Jerome,  and  have  been  incorporated  in  the  Opera 
of  this  father  (tom.  xi.  ed.  of  Yallarsius).  Of  the  other  writings  of 
Pelagius  (De  natura ;  De  libero  arbitrio ;  Capitula ;  Epist.  ad  Innocent. 
I.,  which  accompanied  the  Libellus  fidei),  we  have  only  fragments  in 
the  works  of  his  opponents,  especially  Augustine.  In  like  manner  we 
have  only  fragments  of  the  writings  of  Ccelestitts:  Definitiones; 
Symbolum  ad  Zosimum ;  and  of  Jtjliaxcs  of  Eclanuji  :  Libri  iv.  ad 
Turbantium  episcopum  contra  Augustini  primum  de  nuptiis;  Libri 
viii.  ad  Florum  contra  Augustini  secundum  de  nuptiis.  Large  and 
literal  extracts  in  the  extended  replies  of  Augustine  to  Julian. 

II.  AuGrsTim:s  :  De  peccatorum  meritis  et  remissione  (412)  ;  De  spiritu  et 

litera  (413) ;  De  natura  et  gratia  (415)  ;  De  gestis  Pelagii  (417) ;  De 
gratia  Christi  et  de  peccato  originali  (418)  ;  De  nuptiis  et  concupiscen- 
tia  (419);  Contra  duas  Epistolas  Pelagianorum  (420)  ;  Contra  Julia- 
num,  libri  vi.   (421) ;  Opus  imperfectum  contra  Julianura  (429) ;  De 

'  Respecting  the  present  condition  of  the  Maronites,  comp.  also  Robinson's 
Palestine,  Ritter's  Erdkunde,  Bd.  xvii.  Abttieil.  1,  and  Rodiger's  article  in  Herzcg's 
Encycl.  Bd.  x.  p.  176  fF.  A  few  years  ago  (1860),  the  Maronites  drew  upon  them- 
selves the  sympathies  of  Christendom  by  the  cruohies  which  their  old  hereditary 
enemies,  the  Druses,  perpetrated  upon  them. 


784  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

gratia  et  libero  arbitrio  (426  or  427) ;  De  correptione  et  gratia  (427)  ; 
De  prsedestinatione  sanctorum  (428  or  429) ;  De  dono  perseverantisa 
(429) ;  and  other  anti-Pelagian  writings,  which  are  collected  in  the 
10th  volume  of  his  Opera,  in  two  divisions,  ed.  Bened.  Par.  1690,  and 
again  Venet.  1733.  (It  is  the  Venice  Bened.  edition  from  which  I 
have  quoted  throughout  in  this  section.  In  Migne's  edition  of  Aug., 
Par.  1S41,  the  anti-Pelagian  writings  form  likewise  the  tenth  tomus 
of  1912  pages.)  Hieroxymus  :  Ep.  133  (in  Vallarsi's,  and  in  Migne's 
ed. ;  or,  Ep.  43  in  the  Bened.  ed.)  ad  Ctesiphontem  (315) ;  Dialog! 
contra  Pelagianos,  libri  iii.  (Opera,  ed.  Yallars.  vol.  ii.  f.  693-806,  and 
ed.  Migne,  ii.  495-590).  P.  Oeosirs :  Apologeticus  c.  Pelag.  libri  iii. 
(Opera,  ed.  Haverkamp).  Maeius  Meecatok,  a  learned  Latin  monk  in 
Constantinople  (428-451) :  Commonitoria,  429,  431  (ed.  Baluz.  Paris, 
1684,  and  Migne,  Par.  1846^.     Collection  of  the  Acta  in  Mansi,  tom.  iv. 

LITERATUPvE : 

Gerh.  Jon.  Yossirs :  Hist,  de  controversiis,  quas  Pelagius  ejusque  reliquias 
moverunt,  libri  vii.  Lugd.  Batav.  1618  (auct.  ed.  Amstel.  1655). 
Cardinal  HE^^^.  ISToEisirs :  Historia  Pelagiana  et  dissert,  de  Synodo 
Quinta  (Ecumen.  Batavii,  1673,  fol.  (and  in  Opera,  Veron.  1729, 
i.).  Gaeniee  (Jesuit) :  Dissert,  vii.  quibus  Integra  continentur  Pela- 
gianorura  hist,  (in  his  ed.  of  the  Opera  of  Marius  Mercator,  i.  113). 
The  Prcefatio  to  the  10th  vol.  of  the  Benedictine  edition  of  Augustine's 
Opera.  Ooen.  Jassexius  (t  1638) :  Augustinus,  sive  doctrina  S. 
Augustini  de  humanse  natures  sanitate,  aegritudine,  medicina,  adv. 
Pelagianos  et  Massilienses.  Lovan.  1640,  fol.  (lie  read  Augustine 
twenty  times,  and  revived  his  system  in  the  Catholic  church.)  Tille- 
MOXT :  Memoires,  etc.  Tom.  xiii.  pp.  1-1075,  which  is  entirely  de- 
voted to  the  life  of  Augustine.  Cn.  Wilh,  Fr.  TTalch:  Ketzerhisto- 
rie.  Leipz.  1770.  Bd.  iv.  and  v.  Schrockh:  Kirchengescbichte. 
Parts  siv.  and  xv.  (1790).  G.  F.  Wiggees  (sen.) :  Versuch  einer  prag- 
matischen  Darstellung  des  Augustinismus  und  Pelagianismus,  in 
zwei  Theilen.  Hamburg,  1833.  (The  first  part  appeared  1821  in  Ber- 
lin ;  the  second,  which  treats  of  Semi-Pelagianism,  in  1833  at  Hamburg, 
The  common  title-page  bears  date  1833.  The  first  part  has  also  been 
translated  into  English  by  Prof.  Emeeso:?^,  Andover,  1840).  J.  L. 
Jacobi  :  Die  Lehre  des  Pelagius.  Leipzig,  1842.  F.  Boheixgee  :  Die 
Kirche  Christi  in  Biographien.  Bd.  i.  Th.  3,  pp.  444-626,  Ztiricb,  1845. 
Gieselee:  Kirchengescbichte.  Bd.  i.  Abth.  2  pp.  106-131  (4th  ed.  1845, 
entirely  favorable  to  Pelagianism).  Neandee:  Kirchengescbichte. 
Bd.  iv.  (2d  ed.  1847,  more  Augustinian).  Schaff:  The  Pelagian 
Controversy,  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  Andover,  May,  1848  (No. 
xviii.).  Theod.  Gangauf:  Metaphysische  Psychologic  des  heiligen 
Augustinus.     Augsb.  1852.     Thorough,  but  not  completed.     H.  Hart 


§    146.      CHAKACTEE   OF   THE   PELAGIAN    CONTROVEEST.    7S5 

Milman:  History  of  Latin  Christianity.  'N'ew  York,  1860,  vol.  i.  ch. 
ii.  PI).  lG-1-194.  Jul.  Mullek:  Die  christliche  Lelire  von  der  Siinde. 
Bresl.  1838,  5th  ed.  1866,  2  vols.  (An  English  translation  by  Pulsford, 
Edinburgh.)  The  same  :  Der  Pelagianismus.  Berlin,  1854.  (A  brief, 
but  admirable  essay.)  Hefelk:  Conciliengeschichte.  Bd.  ii.  1856, 
p.  91  ff.  W.  Cunningham:  Historical  Theology.  Edinburgh,  1803, 
vol.  i.  pp.  321-358.  Fk.  Worter  (R.  C.)  :  Dei;,  Pelagianismus  nach 
seinem  Ursprung  und  seiner  Lehre.  Freiburg,'  1866.  Noueeisson  : 
La  philosophie  ^e  S.  Augustin.  Par,  1866,  2  vols.  (vol.  1.  452  fF. ;  ii. 
352  flf.).  Comp.  also  the  literature  in  §  178,  and  the  relevant  chap- 
ters in  the  Doctrine-Histories  of  Munschek,  Baumgaeten-Crusius, 
Hagenbach,  ISTeandee,  Baxje,  Beok,  Shedd. 


§  146.     Character  of  the  Pelagian  Controversy. 

"While  the  Oriental  Church  was  exhausting  her  energies  in 
the  Christological  controversies,  and,  with  the  help  of  the 
"West,  was  developing  the  ecumenical  doctrine  of  the  person 
of  Christ,  the  Latin  church  was  occupied  with  the  great  an- 
thropological and  soteriological  questions  of  sin  and  grace,  and 
was  bringing  to  Kght  great  treasures  of  truth,  without  either 
help  from  the  Eastern  church  or  influence  upon  her.  The 
third  ecumenical  council,  it  is  true,  condemned  Pelagianism, 
but  without  careful  investigation,  and  merely  on  account  of  its 
casual  connection  with  Nestorianism.  The  Greek  historians, 
Socrates,  Sozomen,Tlieodoret,  and  Evagrius,  although  they  treat 
of  that  period,  take  not  the  slightest  notice  of  the  Pelagian 
controversies.  In  this  fact  we  see  the  predominantly  practical 
character  of  the  West,  in  contradistinction  to  the  contempla- 
tive and  speculative  East.  Yet  the  Christological  and  anthro- 
pologico-soteriological  controversies  are  vitally  connected, 
since  Christ  became  man  for  the  redemption  of  man.  The 
person  and  the  work  of  the  Redeemer  presuppose  on  the  one 
hand  man's  capability  of  redemption,  and  on  the  other  his 
need  of  redemption.  Manichseism  denies  the  former,  Pelagian- 
ism the  latter.  In  opposition  to  these  two  fundamental  anthro- 
pological heresies,  the  church  was  called  to  develope  the  whole 
truth. 

Before  Augustine  the  anthropology  of  the  church '  was  ex- 
ceedingly crude  and  indefinite.     There  was  a  general  agree- 

voL.  II. — 50 


786  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

ment  as  to  the  apostasy  and  the  moral  accountabilitj-  of  man, 
the  terrible  curse  of  sin,  and  the  necessity  of  redeeming  grace ; 
but  not  as  to  the  extent  of  native  corruption,  and  the  relation 
of  human  freedom  to  divine  grace  in  the  work  of  regeneration 
and  conversion.  The  Greek,  and  particularly  the  Alexandrian 
fathers,  in  opposition  to  the  dualism  and  fatalism  of  the  Gnos- 
tic systems,  which  made  evil  a  necessity  of  nature,  laid  great 
stress  upon  human  freedom,  and  upon  the  indispensable  coope- 
ration of  this  freedom  with  divine  grace ;  while  the  Latin 
fathers,  especially  Tertullian  and  Cyj)rian,  Hilary  and  Am- 
brose, guided  rather  by  their  practical  experience  than  by 
speculative  principles,  emphasized  the  hereditary  sin  and 
hereditary  guilt  of  man,  and  the  sovereignty  of  God's  grace, 
without,  however,  denying  freedom  and  individual  accounta- 
bility.' The  Greek  church  adhered  to  her  undeveloped  syner- 
gism^ which  coordinates  the  human  will  and  divine  grace  as 
factors  in  the  work  of  conversion  ;  the  Latin  church,  under  the 
influence  of  Augustine,  advanced  to  the  system  of  a  divine 
inonergism^  which  gives  God  all  the  glory,  and  makes  freedom 
itself  a  result  of  grace ;  while  Pelagianism,  on  the  contrary, 
represented  the  principle  of  a  human  monergism^  which  as- 
cribes tlie  chief  merit  of  conversion  to  man,  and  reduces  grace 
to  a  mere  external  auxiliary.  After  Augustine's  death,  how- 
ever, the  intermediate  system  of  Semi-Pelagianismj  akin  to 
the  Greek  synergism,  became  prevalent  in  the  West. 

Pelagius  and  Augustine,  in  whom  these  opposite  forais  of 
monergism  were  embodied,  are  representative  men,  even  more 
strictly  than  Arius  and  Athanasius  before  them,  or  Nestorius 
and  Cyril  after  them.  The  one,  a  Briton,  more  than  once 
convulsed  the  world  by  his  errors ;  the  other,  an  African,  more 
than  once  by  his  truths.     They  represented  principles  and 


'  On  the  anthropology  of  the  ante-Nicene  and  Nicene  fathers,  comp.  the  rele- 
vant sections  in  the  larger  works  on  Doctrine  History,'  ^rffl  AViggers,  1.  c.  vol.  i.  p. 
407  ff.  .  ' 

*  From  (Tvv  and  tpyov.  There  are,  it  may  be  remarked,  different  forms  of  syn- 
ergism. The  synergism  of  Melanchthou  subordinates  the  human  activity  to  the 
divine,  and  assigns  to  grace  the  initiative  in  the  work  of  conversion. 

^  From  ijl6vov  and  tp-yov. 


§   146.      CHARACTER   OF   THE   PELAGIAN   COXTKOVEKST.      787 

tendencies,  which,  in  various  modifications,  extend  through 
the  whole  history  of  the  church,  and  reappear  in  its  suc- 
cessive epochs.  The  Gottschalk  controversy  in  the  ninth 
centmy,  the  Keformation,  the  synergistic  controversy  in  the 
Lutheran  church,  the  Anninian  in  the  Reformed,  and  the  Jan- 
senistic  in  the  Roman  Catholic,  only  reproduce  the  same  great 
contest  in  new  and  specific  aspects.  Each  system  reflects  the 
personal  character  and  experience  of  its  author.  Pelagins  was 
an  upright  monk,  who  without  inward  conflicts  won  for  him- 
self, in  the  way  of  tranquil  development,  a  legal  piety  which 
knew  neither  the  depths  of  sin  nor  the  heights  of  grace. 
Augustine,  on  the  other  hand,  passed  through  sharp  convul- 
sions and  bitter  conflicts,  till  he  was  overtaken  by  the  unmerit- 
ed grace  of  God,  and  created  anew  to  a  life  of  faith  and  love. 
Pelagius  had  a  singularly  clear,  though  contracted  mind,  and 
an  earnest  moral  purpose,  but  no  enthusiasm  for  lofty  ideals  ; 
and  hence  he  found  it  not  hard  to  realize  his  lower  standard  of 
hohness.  Augustine  had  a  bold  and  soaring  intellect,  and 
glowing  heart,  and  only  found  peace  after  he  had  long  been 
tossed  by  the  waves  of  passion  ;  he  had  tasted  all  the  misery 
of  sin,  and  then  all  the  glory  of  redemption,  and  this  experi- 
ence qualified  him  to  understand  and  set  forth  these  antagonis- 
tic powers  far  better  than  his  opponent,  and  with  a  strength 
and  fulness  surpassed  only  by  the  inspired  apostle  Paul.  In- 
deed, Augustine,  of  all  the  fathers,  most  resembles,  in  experi- 
ence and  doctrine,  this  very  apostle,  and  stands  next  to  him  in 
his  influence  upon  the  Reformers. 

The  Pelagian  controversy  turns  upon  the  mighty  antithesis 
of  sin  and  grace.  It  embraces  the  whole  cycle  of  doctrine 
respecting  the  ethical  and  religious  relation  of  man  to  God, 
and  includes,  therefore,  the  doctrines  of  human  freedom,  of 
the  primitive  state,  of  the  fall,  of  regeneration  and  conversion, 
of  the  eternal  purpose  of  redemption,  and  of  the  nature  and 
operation  of  the  grace  of  God.  It  comes  at  last  to  the  ques- 
tion, whether  redemption  is  chiefly  a  work  of  God  or  of  man  ; 
whether  man  needs  to  be  born  anew,  or  merely  improved. 
The  soul  of  the  Pelagian  system  is  human  freedom ;  the  soul 
of  the  Augustinian  is  divine  grace.     Pelagius  starts  fi'om  the 


788  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590, 

natural  man,  and  "works  up,  by  his  own  exertions,  to  righteous- 
ness and  holiness.  Augustine  despairs  of  the  moral  sufficiency 
of  man,  and  derives  the  new  life  and  all  power  for  good  from 
the  creative  grace  of  God.  The  one  system  proceeds  from  the 
liberty  of  choice  to  legalistic  piety ;  the  other  from  the  bond- 
age of  sin  to  the  evangelical  liberty  of  the  children  of  God. 
To  the  former  Christ  is  merely  a  teacher  and  example,  and 
grace  an  external  auxiliary  to  the  development  of  the  native 
powers  of  man ;  to  the  latter  he  is  also  Priest  and  King, 
and  grace  a  creative  principle,  which  begets,  nourishes,  and 
consummates  a  new  life.  The  former  makes  regeneration  and 
conversion  a  gradual  process  of  the  strengthening  and  perfect- 
ing of  human  virtue ;  the  latter  makes  it  a  complete  transfor- 
mation, in  which  the  old  disappears  and  all  becomes  new.  Tlie 
one  loves  to  admire  the  dignity  and  strength  of  man ;  the 
other  loses  itself  in  adoration  of  the  glory  and  omnipotence  of 
God.  The  one  flatters  natural  pride,  the  other  is  a  gospel  for 
penitent  publicans  and  sinners.  Pelagianism  begins  with 
self-exaltation  and  ends  with  the  sense  of  self-deception  and 
impotency.  Augustinianism  casts  man  first  into  the  dust  of 
humiliation  and  despair,  in  order  to  lift  him  on  the  wings  of 
grace  to  supernatural  strength,  and  leads  him  through  the  hell 
of  self-knowledge  up  to  the  heaven  of  the  knowledge  of  God. 
The  Pelagian  system  is  clear,  sober,  and  intelligible,  but  super- 
ficial ;  the  Augustinian  sounds  the  depths  of  knowledge  and 
experience,  and  renders  reverential  homage  to  mystery.  The 
former  is  grounded  upon  the  philosophy  of  common  sense, 
which  is  indispensable  for  ordinary  life,  but  has  no  perception 
of  divine  things  ;  the  latter  is  grounded  upon  the  philosophy 
of  the  regenerate  reason,  which  breaks  through  the  limits  of 
nature,  and  penetrates  the  depths  of  divine  revelation.  The 
former  starts  with  the  proposition :  Intellectus  prcBcedit  fidem  / 
the  latter  with  the  opposite  maxim  :  Fides  j^rcecedit  intellec- 
tum.  Both  make  use  of  the  Scriptures ;  the  one,  however,  con- 
forming them  to  reason,  the  .other  subjecting  reason  to  them. 
Pelagianism  has  an  immistakable  affinity  with  rationalism,  and 
supplies  its  practical  side.  To  the  natural  will  of  the  former 
system  corresponds  the  natural  reason  of  the  latter ;  and  as 


§   146.      CHAKACTEK   OF   THE   PELAGIAN   CONTEOVEESY.     789 

the  natural  will,  according  to  Pelagianism,  is  competent  to 
good,  so  is  the  natural  reason,  according  to  rationalism,  compe- 
tent to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth.  All  rationalists  are  Pela- 
gian in  their  anthropology ;  but  Pelagius  and  Coelestius 
were  not  consistent,  and  declared  their  agreement  with  the 
traditional  orthodoxy  in  all  other  doctrines,  though  with- 
out entering  into  their  deeper  meaning  and  connection. 
Even  divine  mysteries  may  be  believed  in  a  purely  external, 
mechanical  way,  by  inheritance  from  the  past,  as  the  history 
of  theology,  especially  in  the  East,  abundantly  proves. 

The  true  solution  of  the  difficult  question  respecting  the 
relation  of  divine  grace  to  human  freedom  in  the  work  of  con- 
version, is  not  found  in  the  denial  of  either  factor  ;  for  this 
would  either  elevate  man  to  the  dignity  of  a  self-redeemer,  or 
degrade  him  to  an  irrational  machine,  and  would  ultimately 
issue  either  in  fatalistic  pantheism  or  in  atheism ;  but  it  must 
be  sought  in  such  a  reconciliation  of  the  two  factors  as  gives 
full  weight  both  to  the  sovereignty  of  God  and  to  the  responsi- 
bility of  man,  yet  assigns  a  preeminence  to  the  divine  agency 
corresponding  to  the  infinite  exaltation  of  the  Creator  and 
Kedeemer  above  the  sinful  creature.  And  although  Augus- 
tine's solution  of  the  problem  is  not  altogether  satisfactory, 
and  although  in  his  zeal  against  the  Pelagian  error  he  has  in- 
clined to  the  opposite  extreme ;  yet  in  all  essential  points,  he 
has  the  Scriptures,  especially  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  as  well  as 
Christian  experience,  and  the  profoundest  speculation,  on  his 
side.  Whoever  reads  the  tenth  volume  of  his  works,  which 
contains  his  Anti-Pelagian  writings  in  more  than  fourteen  hun- 
dred folio  columns  (in  the  Benedictine  edition),  will  be  moved 
to  wonder  at  the  extraordinary  wealth  of  thought  and  experi- 
ence treasured  in  them  for  all  time ;  especially  if  he  considers 
that  Augustine,  at  the  breaking  out  of  the  Pelagian  controver- 
sy, was  already  fifty-seven  years  old,  and  had  passed  through 
the  Manichsean  and  Donatist  controversies.  Such  giants  in 
theology  could  only  arise  in  an  age  when  this  queen  of  the 
sciences  drew  into  her  service  the  whole  mental  activity  of 
the  time. 

The  Pelagian  controversy  was  conducted  with  as  great  an 


790  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

expenditure  of  mental  energy,  and  as  much  of  moral  and 
religious  earnestness,  but  with  less  passion  and  fewer  intrigues, 
than  the  Trinitarian  and  Chi'istological  conflicts  in  the  East. 
In  the  foreground  stood  the  mighty  genius  and  pure  zeal  of 
Augustine,  who  never  violated  theological  dignity,  and,  though 
of  thoroughly  energetic  convictions,  had  a  heart  full  of  love. 
Yet  even  he  yielded  so  far  to  the  intolerant  spirit  of  his  time 
as  to  justify  the  repression  of  the  Donatist  and  Pelagian  errors 
by  civil  penalties. 

§  147.    External  History  of  the  Pelagian  Controversy^ 
A.  D.  411-431. 

Pelagius'  was  a  simple  monk,  born  about  the  middle 
of  the  fourth  century  in  Britain,  the  extremity  of  the  then 
civilized  world.  He  was  a  man  of  clear  intellect,  mild  dispo- 
sition, learned  culture,  and  spotless  character ;  even  Augus- 
tine, w^ith  all  his  abhorrence  of  his  doctrines,  repeatedly 
speaks  respectfully  of  the  man.'^  He  studied  the  Greek  theolo- 
gy, especially  that  of  the  Antiochian  school,  and  early  showed 
great  zeal  for  the  improvement  of  himself  and  of  the  world. 
But  his  morality  was  not  so  much  the  rich,  deep  life  of  faith, 
as  it  was  the  external  legalism,  the  ascetic  self-discipline  and 
self-righteousness  of  monkery.  It  was  characteristic,  that, 
even  before  the  controversy,  he  took  great  offence  at  the  well- 
known  saying  of  Augustine :  "  Give  what  thou  commandest, 
and  command  what  thou  wilt."  ^     He  could  not  conceive,  that 

'  His  British  name  is  said  to  have  been  Morgan,  that  is,  Of  the  sea,  Marigena, 
in  Greek  XleXayios. 

^  Comp.  the  passages  where  Augustine  speaks  of  Pelagius,  in  Wiggers,  1.  c.  i. 
p.  35  f.  Yet  Augustine,  not  without  reason,  accuses  him  of  dupheity,  on  ac- 
count of  his  conduct  at  the  synod  of  Diospohs  in  Palestine.  Wiggers  (i.  p.  40) 
says  of  him:  "It  must  be  admitted  that  Pelagius  was  not  always  sufficiently 
straightforward ;  that  he  did  not  always  express  his  views  without  ambiguity ;  that, 
in  fact,  he  sometimes  in  sjnods  condemned  opinions  which  wrre  manifestly  his  o\vn. 
This  may  have  arisen,  it  is  true,  in  great  part  from  his  love  of  peace  and  the  slight 
value  which  he  attached  to  theoretical  opinions." 

^  "Da  quod  jubes,  et  jube  quod  vis,"  Confess.  1.  x.  c.  29,  et  passim.  Augus- 
tine himself  relates  the  above-mentioned  fact,  De  dono  persev.  o.  20  (or  §  53,  tom. 
X.  f.  851):  "Quae  mea  verba,  Pelagius  Romae,  cum  a  quodam  fratre  et  coepiseopo 


ci^iTur^yn^ 


^cM.^^ni/r/^'^^^^  i^;.i«.-^ 


^^L^%  ^/^^^-^  ^  ^^ 


^' 


'^-i^^^'^'/"'^ 


§  147.    EXTERNAL  HISTORY  OF  THE  PELAGIAN  CONTROVERSr.  791 

the  power  to  obey  the  commandment  must  come  from  the  same 
Bom'ce  as  the  commandment  itself.  Faith,  with  him,  was 
hardly  more  than  a  theoretical  belief;  the  main  thing  in  relig- 
ion was  moral  action,  the  keeping  of  the  commandments  of 
God  by  one's  own  strength.  This  is  also  shown  in  the  intro- 
ductory remarks  of  his  letter  to  Demetrias,  a  noble  Roman 
nun,  of  the  gens  Anicia,  Iq  which  he  describes  a  model  virgin 
as  a  proof  of  the  excellency  of  human  nature :  "  As  often  as  I 
have  to  speak  concerning  moral  improvement  and  the  leading 
of  a  holy  life,  I  am  accustomed  first  to  set  forth  the  power  and 
quality  of  human  nature,  and  to  show  what  it  can  accomplish.' 
For  never  are  we  able  to  enter  upon  the  path  of  the  virtues, 
unless  hope,  as  companion,  draws  us  to  them.  For  every 
longing  after  anything  dies  within  us,  so  soon  as  we  despair  of 
attaining  that  thing." 

[n  the  year  409,  Pelagius,  already  advanced  in  life,  was  in 
Rome,  and  composed  a  brief  commentary  on  the  Epistles  of 
Paul.  This  commentary,  which  has  been  preserved  among  the 
works  of  Jerome,  displays  a  clear  and  sober  exegetical  talent.'' 
He  labored  quietly  and  peacefully  for  the  improvement  of  the 
corrupt  morals  of  Rome,  and  converted  the  advocate  Ccelestius, 

meo  fuissent  eo  praesente  commemorata,  ferre  non  potuit,  et  contradicens  aliquanto 
commotius  pene  cum  eo,  qui  ilia  commemoraverat,  litigavit." 

'  "Soleo  prius  humanae  naturae  Tim  qualitatemque  monstrare,  et  quid  efiBcere 
possit,  ostendere."    Ep.  ad  Demetr.  c.  2. 

"  It  found  its  way  among  the  works  of  Jerome  (torn.  xi.  ed.  Vallars.,  and  in 
Migne's  edition,  torn.  xi.  f.  643-902)  before  the  breaking  out  of  the  controversy,  but 
has  received  doctrinal  emendations  from  Cassiodorus,  at  least  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans.  The  confounding  of  Pelagius  with  Jerome  arose  partly  from  his  accom- 
modation to  the  ecclesiastical  terminology,  partly  from  his  actual  agreement  with 
the  prevailing  tendency  of  monasticism.  It  is  remarkable  that  both  wrote  an 
ascetic  letter  to  the  nun  Demetrias.  Comp.  Jerome,  Ep.  130  (ed.  Vallarsi,  and 
Migne,  or  9*7  in  the  Bened.  ed.)  ad  Demetriadem  de  servanda  Virginitate  (written 
in  414).  She  had  also  correspondence  with  Augustine.  Semler  has  published 
the  letters  of -Augustine,  Jerome,  and  Pelagius  to  Demetrias  in  a  separate  form 
(Halle,  1Y75).  Some  have  also  ascribed  to  Pelagius  the  ascetic  Epistola  ad  Celan- 
tiam  matronam  de  ratione  pie  vivendi,  which,  like  his  Ep.  ad  Demetriadem,  has 
found  its  way  into  the  Epistles  of  Jerome  (Ep.  148  in  Yallarsi's  ed.  torn.  i.  1095, 
and  in  Migne's  ed.  tom.  i.  1204).  The  monasticism  of  Pelagius,  however,  was 
much  cooler,  more  sober,  and  more  philosophical  than  that  of  the  enthusiastic 
Jerome,  inclined  as  he  was  to  all  manner  of  extravagances. 


792  THIED   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

of  distinguished,  but  otherwise  unknown  birth,  to  his  monastic 
life,  and  to  his  views.  It  was  from  this  man,  younger,  more 
skilful  in  argument,  more  ready  for  controversy,  and  more 
rigorously  consistent  than  his  teacher,  that  the  controversy 
took  its  rise.  Pelagius  was  the  moral  author,  Coelestius  the  in- 
tellectual author,  of  the  system  represented  by  them.'  They 
did  not  mean  actually  to  found  a  new  system,  but  believed 
themselves  in  accordance  with  Scripture  and  established  doc- 
trine. They  were  more  concerned  with  the  ethical  side  of 
Christianity  than  with  the  dogmatic;  but  their  endeavor 
after  moral  perfection  was  based  upon  certain  views  of  the 
natural  power  of  the  will,  and  these  views  proved  to  be  in 
conflict  with  anthropological  principles  which  had  been  devel- 
oped in  the  African  church  for  the  previous  ten  years  under 
the  influence  of  Augustine. 

In  the  year  411,  the  two  friends,  thus  united  in  sentiment, 
left  Rome,  to  escape  the  dreaded  Gothic  King  Alaric,  and 
went  to  Africa.  They  passed  through  Hippo,  intending  to 
visit  Augustine,  but  found  that  he  was  just  then  at  Carthage, 
occupied  with  the  Donatists.  Pelagius  wrote  him  a  very 
courteous  letter,  which  Augustine  answered  in  a  similar  tone ; 
intimating,  however,  the  importance  of  holding  the  true  doc- 
trine concerning  sin.  "  Pray  for  me,"  he  said,  "  that  God 
may  really  make  me  that  which  you  already  take  me  to  be." 
Pelagius  soon  proceeded  to  Palestine.  Coelestius  applied  for 
presbyters'  orders  in  Carthage,  the  very  place  where  he  had 
most  reason  to  expect  opposition.  This  inconsiderate  step 
brought  on  the  crisis.  He  gained  many  friends,  it  is  true,  by 
his  talents  and  his  ascetic  zeal,  but  at  the  same  time  awakened 
suspicion  by  his  novel  opinions. 

The  deacon  Paulinas  of  Milan,  who  was  just  then  in  Car- 

'  To  this  extent  Pelagius  and  Coelestius  appear  to  sustain  a  relation  to  Pela- 
gianism  similar  to  that  which  Dr.  Pusey  and  John  Henry  Newman  did  to  Puseyism. 
Jerome  (in  his  letter  to  Ctesiphon)  says  of  Coelestius,  that  he  was,  althougli  the 
disciple  of  Pelagius,  yet  teacher  and  leader  of  the  whole  array  (magister  et  totius 
ductor  exercitus).  Augustine  calls  Pelagius  more  dissembling  and  crafty,  Coelestius 
more  franli  and  open  (De  pcccato  orig.  c.  12).  Marius  Mercator  ascribes  to  Coeles- 
tius an  incredibiUs  loquacitas.  But  Augustine  and  Julian  of  Eclanum  also  mutually 
reproach  each  other  with  a  vagabunda  loquacitas. 


§  147.    EXTERNAL  HISTORY  OF  THE  PELAGIAN  CONTROVERSY.  793 

thage,  and  who  shortly  aftervrards  at  the  request  of  Augustine 
\n'ote  the  life  of  Ambrose,  warned  the  bishop  Aurelius  against 
Cffilcstius,  and  at  a  council  held  by  Aurelius  at  Carthage  in 
412/  appeared  as  his  accuser.  Six  or  seven  errors,  he  asserted 
he  had  found  in  the  writings  of  Coelestius  : 

1.  Adam  was  created  mortal,  and  would  have  died,  even 
if  he  had  not  sinned. 

2.  Adam's  fall  injured  himself  alone,  not  the  human 
race. 

3.  Children  come  into  the  world  in  the  same  condition  in 
which  Adam  was  before  the  fall. 

4.  The  human  race  neither  dies  in  consequence  of  Adam's 
fall,  nor  rises  again  in  consequence  of  Christ's  resurrection. 

5.  Unbaptized  children,  as  well  as  others,  are  saved.'' 

6.  The  law,  as  well  as  the  gospel,  leads  to  the  kingdom  of 
lieaven. 

7.  Even  before  Christ  there  were  sinless  men. 

The  principal  propositions  were  the  second  and  third, 
which  are  intimately  connected,  and  which  afterwards  became 
the  especial  subject  of  controversy. 

Ccelestius  returned  evasive  answers.  He  declared  the  prop- 
ositions to  be  speculative  questions  of  the  schools,  which  did 
not  concern  the  substance  of  the  faith,  and  respecting  which 
difierent  opinions  existed  in  the  church.  He  refused  to  recant 
the  errors  charged  upon  him,  and  the  synod  excluded  him 
from  the  communion  of  the  church.  He  immediately  went  to 
Ephesus,  and  was  there  ordained  presbyter. 

Augustine  had  taken  no  part  personally  in  these  transac- 
tions. But  as  the  Pelagian  doctrines  found  many  adherents 
even  in  Africa  and  in  Sicily,  he  wrote  several  treatises  in  refu- 

'  According  to  Mansi  and  the  common  riew.  The  brothers  Balleruii  and  Hefele 
(ii.  91)  decide  in  favor  of  the  year  411.  The  incomplete  Acta  of  the  council  are 
found  in  Mausi,  torn.  iv.  fol.  289  sqq.,  and  in  the  Commonitorium  Marii  Mercatoris 
ibidem,  f.  293. 

'  Marius  Mercator,  it  is  true,  does  not  cite  this  proposition  among  the  others, 
f.  292,  but  he  brings  it  up  subsequently,  f.  296  :  "  In  ipsa  autem  accusatione  capitu- 
lorum,  qufe  eidem  Pelagio  turn  objecta  sunt,  etiam  base  continentur,  cum  aliis 
execrandis,  quae  Coelestius  ejus  discipulus  sentiebat,  id  est,  infantes  etiamsi  non 
baptizentur,  habere  vitam  ccfcrnamy 


794:  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

tation  of  them  so  early  as  412  and  415,  expressing  himself, 
however,  with  respect  and  forbearance.' 

§  148.     The  Pelagian  Controversy  in  Palestine. 

Meanwhile,  in  414,  the  controversy  broke  out  in  Palestine, 
where  Pelagius  was  residing,  and  where  he  had  aroused  atten- 
tion by  a  letter  to  the  nun  Demetrias.  His  opinions  gained 
much  wider  currency  there,  especially  among  the  Origenists  ; 
for  the  Oriental  church  had  not  been  at  all  affected  by  the 
Augustinian  views,  and  accepted  the  two  ideas  of  freedom  and 
grace,  without  attempting  to  define  their  precise  relation  to 
each  other.  But  just  then  there  happened  to  be  in  Palestine 
two  Western  theologians,  Jerome  and  Orosius  ;  and  they  insti- 
tuted opposition  to  Pelagius. 

Jerome,  who  lived  a  monk  at  Bethlehem,  was  at  first  deci- 
dedly favorable  to  the  synergistic  theory  of  the  Greek  fathers, 
but  at  the  same  time  agreed  with  Ambrose  and  Augustine  in 
the  doctrine  of  the  absolutely  universal  corruj)tion  of  sin." 
But  from  an  enthusiastic  admirer  of  Origen  he  had  been 
changed  to  a  bitter  enemy.  The  doctrine  of  Pelagius  con- 
cerning free  will  and  the  moral  ability  of  human  nature  he 
attributed  to  the  infiuence  of  Origen  and  Rufinus  ;  and  he 
took  as  a  personal  insult  an  attack  of  Pelagius  on  some  of  his 
writings.^  He  therefore  wrote  against  him,  though  from 
wounded  pride  and  contempt  he  did  not  e*^en  mention  his 
name ;  first  in  a  letter  answering  inquiries  of  a  certain  Cte- 
siphon  at  Rome  (415) ; '  then  more  at  length  in  a  dialogue  of 

*  De  peccatorum  meritis  et  remissione ;  De  spiritu  et  litera ;  De  natura  et  gratia ; 
De  perfectione  justitiae  hominis. 

'  Compare,  respecting  his  relation  to  Pelagianism,  0.  Zocklek:  Hieronymus 
(1865),  p.  310  ff.  and  p.  420  ff. 

^  Comp.  Jerome :  Prasfut.  libri  i.  in  Jeremiam  (Opera,  cd.  Vallarsi,  tom.  iv.  834 
sq.),  wliere  he  speaks  very  contemptuously  of  Pelagius:  "Nuper  indoctus  calumnia- 
tor erupit,  qui  commentarios  meos  in  epistolam  Pauli  ad  Ephesios  reprehcndendos 
putat."  Soon  afterwards  he  designates  Grunnius,  i.  e.,  Rufinus,  as  his  prajcursor,  and 
thus  connects  him  with  the  Origenistic  heresies.  Pelagius  had  also  expressed  him* 
self  unfavorably  respecting  his  translation  of  the  Old  Testament  from  the  Hebrew.     - 

"  Epist.  133  ad  Ctesiphont.  adv.  Pelag.  (Opera,  i.  1025-1042). 


§   148.      PELAGIAN   C0NTE0VEK8Y   IN   PALESTINE.  795 

three  books  against  the  Pelagians,  written  towards  the  end 
of  the  year  415,  and  soon  after  the  acquittal  of  Pelagius  by 
the  synod  of  Jerusalem.*  Yet  in  this  treatise  and  elsewhere 
Jerome  himself  teaches  the  freedom  of  the  will,  and  only  a 
conditional  predestination  of  divine  foreknowledge,  and  thus, 
with  all  his  personal  bitterness  against  the  Pelagians,  stands  on 
Semi-Pelagian  ground,  though  Augustine  eulogizes  the  dia- 
logue.* 

A  young  Spanish  ecclesiastic,  Paul  Orosius,  was  at  that 
time  living  with  Jerome  for  the  sake  of  more  extended  study, 
and  had  been  sent  to  him  by  Augustine  with  letters  relating 
to  the  Origenistic  and  Pelagian  controversy. 

At  a  diocesan  synod,  convoked  by  the  bishop  John  of  Jeru- 
salem in  June,  415,'  this  Orosius  appeared  against  Pelagius, 
and  gave  information  that  a  council  at  Carthage  had  con- 
demned Ccelestius,  and  that  Augustine  had  written  against 
his  errors.  Pelagius  answered  with  evasion  and  disparage- 
ment :  "  What  matters  Augustine  to  me  ? "  Orosius  gave  his 
opinion,  that  a  man  who  presumed  to  speak  contumeliously 
of  the  bishop  to  whom  the  whole  Korth  African  church  owed 
her  restoration  (alluding  apparently  to  the  settlement  of  the 
Donatist  controversies),  deserved  to  be  excluded  from  the  com- 
munion of  the  whole  church.  John,  who  was  a  great  admirer 
of  the  condemned  Origen,  and  made  little  account  of  the 
authority  of  Augustine,  declared:  "I  am  Augustine,"*  and 
undertook  the  defence  of  the  accused.  He  permitted  Pelagius, 
although  only  a  monk  and  layman,  to  take  his  seat  among  the 
presbyters.^    Nor  did  he  find  fault  with  Pelagius'  assertion, 

'  Dialogus  c.  Pelag.  (Opera,  torn.  ii.  693-806). 

^  Op.  imperf.  contra  Jul.  iv.  88,  where  he  says  of  it:  Mira  et  ut  talem  fidem 
decebat,  venustate  composuit.  The  judgment  is  just  as  to  the  form,  but  too  favora- 
ble as  to  the  contents  of  this  dialogue.     Comp.  Zockler,  Hieronymus,  p.  428. 

'  The  Acta  of  the  Conventus  Hierosolymitanus,  according  to  a  report  of  Oro- 
sius, in  his  Apologia  pro  libertate  arbitrii,  cap.  3  and  4,  are  found  in  Mansi,  iv.  301 
sqq. 

*  "  Augustinus  ego  sum."  To  this  Orosius  replied  not  infelicitously :  "  Si  Angus- 
tini  personam  sumis,  Augustini  sententiam  sequere."     Mansi,  iv.  308. 

^  Orosius  was  much  scandahzed  by  the  fact  that  a  bishop  should  order  "  laicum 
in  consessu  presbjterorum,  reum  haereseos  manifestae  in  medio  catholicorum  sedere." 


Y96  THIED  PEEIOD.   A.D.    311-590. 

that  man  can  easily  keep  tlie  commandments  of  God,  and 
become  free  from  sin,  after  the  latter  had  conceded,  in  a  very 
indefinite  manner,  that  for  this  the  help  of  God  is  necessary. 
Pelagius  had  the  advantage  of  understanding  both  languages, 
while  John  spoke  only  Greek,  Orosius  only  Latin,  and  the 
interpreter  often  translated  inaccurately.  After  much  discus- 
sion it  was  resolved,  that  the  matter  should  be  laid  before  the 
Roman  bishop,  Innocent,  since  both  parties  in  the  controversy 
belonged  to  the  Western  church.  Meanwhile  these  should 
refrain  from  all  further  attacks  on  each  other. 

A  second  Palestinian  council  resulted  still  more  favorably 
to  Pelagius.  This  consisted  of  fourteen  bishops,  and  was  held 
at  Diospolis  or  Lydda,  in  December  of  the  same  year,  under 
the  presidency  of  Eulogius,  bishop  of  Csesarea,  to  judge  of  an 
accusation  preferred  by  two  banished  bishops  of  Gaul,  Heros 
and  Lazarus,  acting  in  concert  with  Jerome.*  The  charges 
were  unskilfully  drawn  up,  and  Pelagius  was  able  to  avail 
himself  of  equivocations,  and  to  condemn  as  folly,  though  not 
as  heresy,  the  teachings  of  Coelestius,  which  were  also  his  own. 
The  synod,  of  which  John  of  Jerusalem  was  a  member,  did 
not  go  below  the  surface  of  the  question,  nor  in  fact  understand 
it,  but  acquitted  the  accused  of  all  heresy.  Jerome  is  justified 
in  calling  this  a  "  miserable  synod ; "  ^  although  Augustine  is 
also  warranted  in  saying :  "  It  was  not  heresy,  that  was  there 
acquitted,  but  the  man  who  denied  the  heresy."  * 

Jerome's  polemical  zeal  against  the  Pelagians  cost  him 
dear.  In  the  beginning  of  the  year  416,  a  mob  of  Pelagianiz- 
ing  monks,  ecclesiastics,  and  vagabonds  broke  into  his  monas- 
tery at  Bethlehem,  maltreated  the  inmates,  set  the  building  on 
fire,  and  compelled  the  aged  scholar  to  take  to  flight.  Bishop 
John  of  Jerusalem  let  this  pass  unpunished.     No  wonder  that 

^  The  scattered  accounts  of  the  Concilium  Diospolitanum  are  collected  in  Mansi, 
torn.  iv.  311  sqq.     Comp.  Hefele,  ii.  p.  95  ff. 

^  "Quidquid  in  ilia  miserabili  synodo  Diospolitana  dixisse  se  denegat,  in  hoc 
opere  confitetur,"  he  wrote,  a.  d.  419,  in  a  letter  to  Augustine  (Ep.  143,  ed.  Yallars. 
torn.  i.  10G7).     Comp.  Mansi,  iv.  315. 

'  Comp.  Augustine,  De  gestis  Pelagii,  c.  1  sqq.  (torn.  x.  fol.  192  sqq.).  Popo 
Innocent  I.  (402-41'7)  wrote  a  consoling  letter  to  Jerome,  and  a  letter  of  reproof  tc 
John  of  Jerusalem  for  his  inaction.     Epp.  136  and  137  in  Jerome's  Epistles. 


§    14:9.       POSITION   OF   THE   EOilAN   CnUECH.  797 

Jerome,  even  dm-ing  tlie  last  years  of  his  life,  in  several  epis- 
tles indulges  in  occasional  sallies  of  anger  against  Pelagius, 
■whom  he  calls  a  second  Catiline. 


§  149. ,  Position  of  the  Roman  Church.     Condemnation 
of  Pelagianism. 

The  question  took  another  turn  when  it  was  brought  before 
the  Roman  see.  Two  Xorth  African  synods,  in  416,  one  at 
Carthage  and  one  at  Mileve  (now  Mela),  again  condemned  the 
Pelagian  error,  and  communicated  their  sentence  to  pope  Inno- 
cent.' A  third  and  more  confidential  letter  was  addressed  to 
him  by  five  North  African  bishops,  of  whom  Augustine  was 
one."*  Pelagius  also  sent  him  a  letter  and  a  confession  of  faith, 
which,  however,  were  not  received  in  due  time. 

Innocent  undei'stood  both  the  controversy  and  the  interests 
of  the  Roman  see.  He  commended  the  Africans  for  having 
addressed  themselves  to  the  church  of  St.  Peter,  before  which 
it  was  seemly  that  all  the  affairs  of  Chiustendom  should  be 
brought ;  he  expressed  his  fall  agreement  with  the  condemna- 
tion of  Pelagius,  Coelestius,  and  their  adherents;  but  he  re- 
frained from  giving  judgment  respecting  the  sjmod  of  Dios- 
polis.^ 

But  soon  afterwards  (in  417)  Innocent  died,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Zosimus,  who  was  apparently  of  Oriental  extraction 
(417-418).'  At  this  juncture,  a  letter  from  Pelagius  to  Inno- 
cent was  received,  in  which  he  complained  of  having  suffered 
wrong,  and  gave  assurance  of  his  orthodoxy.  Coelestius  ap- 
peared personally  in  Rome,  and  succeeded  by  his  written  and 
oral  explanations  in  satisfying  Zosimus.  He,  like  Pelagius, 
demonstrated  with  great  fulness  his  orthodoxy  on  points  not  at 
all  in  question,  represented  the  actually  controverted  points  as 

'  See  the  proceedings  of  the  Concilium  Carthaginense  in  ilansi,  iv.  321  sqq., 
and  of  the  Concilium  Milevitanum,  ibid.  f.  326  sqq. 

'  Mansi,  ir.  837  sqq. 

'  The  answers  of  Innocent  are  found  in  Mansi,  tom.  iii.  f.  1071  sqq. 

*  The  notices  of  his  life,  as  well  as  the  Epistolee  and  Decreta  Zosimi  papse,  are 
collected  La  Mansi,  iv.  345  sqq. 


798  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

unimportant  questions  of  the  schools,  and  professed  himself 
ready,  if  in  error,  to  be  corrected  by  the  judgment  of  the 
Roman  bishop. 

Zosimus,  who  evidently  had  no  independent  theological 
opinion  whatever,  now  issued  (ilY)  to  the  North  African 
bishops  an  encyclical  letter  accompanied  by  the  documentary 
evidence,  censuring  them  for  not  having  investigated  the  mat- 
ter more  thoroughly,  and  for  having  aspired,  in  foolish,  over- 
curious  controversies,  to  know  more  than  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
At  the  same  time  he  bore  emphatic  testimony  to  the  orthodoxy 
of  Pelagius  and  Coelestius,  and  described  theii'  chief  opponents, 
Heros  and  Lazarus,  as  worthless  characters,  whom  he  had  vis- 
ited with  excommunication  and  deposition.  They  in  Rome, 
he  says,  could  hardly  refrain  from  tears,  that  such  men,  who 
so  often  mentioned  the  gratia  Dei  and  the  adjutoriujn  divinum^ 
should  have  been  condemned  as  heretics.  Finally  he  entreated 
the  bishops  to  submit  themselves  to  the  authority  of  the  Ro- 
man see.' 

This  temporary  favor  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  towards  the 
Pelagian  heresy  is  a  significant  presage  of  the  indulgence  of 
later  popes  for  Pelagianizing  tendencies,  and  of  the  papal  con- 
demnation of  Jansenism. 

The  Africans  were  too  sure  of  their  cause,  to  yield  submis- 
sion to  so  weak  a  judgment,  which,  moreover,  was  in  manifest 
conflict  with  that  of  Innocent.  In  a  council  at  Carthage,  in 
417  or  418,  they  protested,  respectfully  but  decidedly,  against 
the  decision  of  Zosimus,  and  gave  him  to  understand  that  he 
was  allowing  himself  to  be  greatly  deceived  by  the  indefinite 
explanations  of  Coelestius.  In  a  general  African  council  held 
at  Carthage  in  418,  the  bishops,  over  two  hundred  in  number, 
defined  their  opposition  to  the  Pelagian  errors,  in  eight  (or 
nine)  Canons,  which  are  entirely  conformable  to  the  Augus- 
tinian  view.*     They  are  in  the  following  tenor : 

''  See  the  two  epistles  of  Zosimus  ad  Africanos  episcopos,  in  Mansi,  iv.  350  and 
353. 

*  It  is  the  16th  Carthaginian  synod.  Mansi  gives  the  canons  in  full,  torn.  iii. 
810-823  (comp.  iv.  Z11).  So  also  Wiggers,  i.  214  ff.  Hefele,  ii.  pp.  102-106,  gives 
only  extracts  of  them. 


§   149.      POSITION   OF   THE  KOMAN   CHURCH.  799 

1.  Whosoever  says,  that  Adam  was  created  mortal,  and 
would,  even  without  sin,  have  died  by  natural  necessity,  let 
him  be  anathema. 

2.  Whoever  rejects  infant  baj)tism,  or  denies  original  sin 
in  children,  so  that  the  baptismal  formula,  "  for  the  remission 
of  sins,"  would  have  to  be  taken  not  in  a  strict,  but  in  a  loose 
sense,  let  him  be  anathema. 

3.  Whoever  says,  that  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  or  else- 
where, there  is  a  certain  middle  place,  where  children  dying 
without  baptism  live  happy  (beate  vivant),  while  yet  without 
baptism  they  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  i.  e., 
into  eternal  life,  let  him  be  anathema,^ 

The  fourth  canon  condemns  the  doctrine  that  the  justifying 
grace  of  God  merely  effects  the  forgiveness  of  sins  already 
committed ;  and  the  remaining  canons  condemn  other  super- 
ficial views  of  the  grace  of  God  and  the  sinfulness  of 
man. 

At  the  same  time  the  Africans  succeeded  in  procuring  from 
the  emperor  Honorius  edicts  against  the  Pelagians. 

These  things  produced  a  change  in  the  opinions  of  Zosimus, 
and  about  the  middle  of  the  year  418,  he  issued  an  encyclical 
letter  to  all  the  bishops  of  both  East  and  West,  pronouncing 
the  anathema  upon  Pelagius  and  Coelestius  (who  had  mean- 
while left  Rome),  and  declaring  his  coDcurrence  with  the  deci- 
sions of  the  council  of  Carthage  in  the  doctrines  of  the  corrup- 
tion of  human  nature,  of  baptism,  and  of  grace.  Whoever 
refused  to  subscribe  the  encyclical,  was  to  be  deposed,  banished 
from  his  church,  and  deprived  of  his  property.^ 

Eighteen  bishops  of  Italy  refused  to  subscribe,  and  were 

'  It  is  significant,  that  the  third  canon,  which  denies  the  salvation  of  unbaptized 
children,  is  of  doubtful  authenticity,  and  is  wanting  in  Isidore  and  Dionysius.  Hence 
the  diflference  in  the  number  of  the  canons  against  the  Pelagians,  as  to  whether  there 
are  8  or  9. 

^  Epistola  tractoria,  or  tractatoria,  of  which  only  some  fragments  are  extant. 
Comp.  Mansi,  iv.  370.  This  letter  was  written  after  and  not  before  the  African 
council  of  418  and  the  promulgation  of  the  sacrum  rescriptum  of  Honorius  against 
the  Pelagians,  as  Tillemont  (xiii.  738)  and  the  Benedictines  (m  the  Preface  to  the 
10th  volume  of  the  Opera  August.  §  18)  have  proved,  in  opposition  to  Baronius, 
Noria,  and  Gamier. 


800  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

deposed.  Several  of  these  afterwards  recanted,  and  were 
restored. 

The  most  distinguished  one  of  them,  however,  the  bishop 
Julian,  of  Eclanum,  a  small  place  near  Capua  in  Campania, 
remained  steadfast  till  his  death,  and  in  banishment  vindicated 
his  principles  with  great  ability  and  zeal  against  Augustine, 
to  whom  he  attributed  all  the  misfortunes  of  his  party,  and 
who  elaborately  confuted  him.'  Julian  was  the  most  learned, 
the  most  acute,  and  the  most  systematic  of  the  Pelagians,  and 
the  most  formidable  opponent  of  Augustine ;  deserving  respect 
for  his  talents,  his  uprightness  of  life,  and  his  immovable  fidel- 
ity to  his  convictions,  but  unquestionably  censurable  for  ex- 
cessive passion  and  overbearing  pride.'^ 

Julian,  Ccelestius,  and  other  leaders  of  the  exiled  Pelagians, 
were  hospitably  received  in  Constantinople,  in  429,  by  the 
patriarch  Nestorius,  who  sympathized  with  their  doctrine  of 
the  moral  competency  of  the  will,  though  not  with  their  denial 
of  original  sin,  and  who  interceded  for  them  with  the  emperor 
and  with  pope  Celestine,  but  in  vain.  Theodosius,  instructed 
by  Marius  Mercator  in  the  merits  of  the  case,  commanded  the 
heretics  to  leave  the  capital  (429).  ISTpstorius,  in  a  still  extant 
letter  to  Coelestius,^  accords  to  him  the  highest  titles  of  honor, 
and  comforts  him  with  the  examples  of  John  the  Baptist  and 
the  persecuted  apostles.  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  (f  428),  the 
author  of  the  l!Testorian  Christology,  wrote  in  419  a  book 
against  the  Augustinian  anthropology,  of  which  fragments 
only  are  left." 

^  In  two  large  works:  Contra  Julianum,  libri  vi.  (Opera,  torn,  x,  f.  49'7-'i'll), 
and  in  the  Opus  imperfectum  contra  secundam  Julian!  responsionem,  in  six  books 
(torn.  X.  P.  ii.  f.  874-1386),  before  completing  which  he  died  (a.  d.  430). 

'  Gennadius,  in  his  Liber  de  scriptoribus  ecclesiasticis,  calls  Julian  of  Eclanum 
"  vir  acer  ingenio,  in  divinis  scripturis  doctus,  Graeca  et  Latina  lingua  scholasticus." 
By  Augustine,  however,  in  the  Opus  imperf.  contra  Jul.  1.  iv.  50  (Opera,  x.  P.  ii. 
fol.  1163),  he  is  called  "in  disputatione  loquacissimus,  in  contentione  calumniosissi- 
mus,  in  professione  fallacissimus,"  because  he  maligned  the  Catholics,  while  giving 
himself  out  for  a  CathoUc.     He  was  married. 

^  In  Marius  Mercator,  in  a  Latin  translation,  ed.  Garnier-Migne,  p.  182. 

*  In  Photius,  Bibl.  cod.  177,  and  in  the  Latin  translation  of  Marius  Mercator, 
also  in  the  works  of  Jerome,  tom.  ii.  807-814  (ed.  Vail.).  The  book  was  written 
contra  Hiramum,  i.  e.,  Hieronymum,  and  was  entitled:  Uphs  rouy  Xeyoyras  ^v<tqi 


§    149.      COIJDEiES'ATION   OF   PELAGIANISM.  801 

Of  the  subsequent  life  of  Pelagius  and  Ccfilestius  we  have 
no  account.  The  time  and  place  of  their  death  are  entirely 
unknown.  Julian  is  said  to  have  ended  his  life  a  schoolmaster 
in  Sicily,  a.  d.  450,  after  having  sacrificed  all  his  property  for 
the  poor  during  a  famine. 

Pelagianism  was  thus,  as  early  as  about  the  year  430, 
externally  vanquished.  It  never  formed  an  ecclesiastical  sect, 
but  simply  a  theological  school.  It  continued  to  have  individ- 
ual adherents  in  Italy  till  towards  the  middle  of  the  fifth  cen- 
tury, so  that  the  Roman  bishop,  Leo  the  Great,  found  himself 
obliged  to  enjoin  on  the  bishops  by  no  means  to  receive  any 
Pelagian  to  the  communion  of  tbe  churcli  without  an  express 
recantation. 

At  the  third  ecumenical  council  in  Ephesus,  a.  d.  431  (the 
year  after  Augustine's  death),  Pelagius  (or  more  properly 
Ccelestius)  was  put  in  the  same  category  with  ^estorius.  And 
indeed  there  is  a  certain  affinity  between  them :  both,  favor  an 
abstract  separation  of  the  divine  and  tbe  liuman,  the  one  in 
the  person  of  Chiist,  the  other  in  the  work  of  conversion,  for- 
bidding all  organic  unity  of  life.  According  to  the  epistle  of 
the  council  to  pope  Celestine,  the  Western  Acta  against  the 
Pelagians  were  read  at  Ephesus  and  approved,  but  we  do  not 
know  in  which  session.  "We  are  also  ignorant  of  the  discus- 
sions attending  this  act.  In  the  canons,  Coelestius,  it  is  true, 
is  twice  condemned  together  with  Kestorius,  but  without 
statement  of  his  teachings.' 

The  position  of  the  Greek  church  upon  this  question  is  only 
negative ;  she  has  in  name  condemned  Pelagianism,  but  bas 
never  received  the  positive  doctrines  of  Augustine.  She  con- 
tinued to  teach  synergistic  or  Semi-Pelagian  views,  without, 

Ktti  Oil  yvcinii  iTTaieti'  robs  av^panrovs  \6yoi  ireVre,  against  those  who  say  that  men 
sin  by  nature,  and  not  by  free  will. 

^  Can.  i.  and  Can.  iv.  The  latter  reads :  "  If  clergymen  fall  away  and  either 
secretly  or  publicly  hold  with  Xestorius  or  Coelestius,  the  synod  decrees  that  they 
also  be  deposed,"  Dr.  Shedd  (ii.  191)  observes  with  justice:  "The  condemnation 
of  Pelagianism  which  was  finally  passed  by  the  council  of  Ephesus,  seems  to  have 
been  owing  more  to  a  supposed  connection  of  the  views  of  Pelagius  with  those  of 
Nestorius,  than  to  a  clear  and  conscientious  conviction  that  his  system  was  contrary 
to  Scripture  and  the  Christian  experience." 

VOL,  II. — 51 


802  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-690. 

however,  entering  into  a  deeper  investigation  of  tlie  relation 
of  liuman  freedom  to  divine  grace.' 

§  150.     The  Pelagian  System:  Primitive  State  and  Freedom 
of  Ma/n  ;   the  Fall. 

The  peculiar  anthropological  doctrines,  which  Pelagius 
clearly  apprehended  and  pnt  in  actual  practice,  which  Coelestius 
dialectically  developed,  and  bishop  Julian  most  acutely  de- 
fended, stand  in  close  logical  connection  with  each  other, 
although  they  were  not  propounded  in  systematic  form.  They 
commend  themselves  at  first  sight  by  their  simplicity,  clear- 
ness, and  plausibility,  and  faithfully  express  the  superficial, 
self-satisfied  morality  of  the  natural  man.  They  proceed  from 
a  merely  empirical  view  of  human  nature,  which,  instead  of 
going  to  the  source  of  moral  life,  stops  with  its  manifestations, 
and  regards  every  person,  and  every  act  of  the  will,  as  standing 
by  itself,  in  no  organic  connection  with  a  great  whole. 

We  may  arrange  the  several  doctrines  of  this  system 
according  to  the  great  stages  of  the  moral  history  of  mankind. 

I.  The  Primitive  State  of  mankind,  and  the  doctrine  of 
Freedom. 

The  doctrine  of  the  primitive  state  of  man  holds  a  subordi- 
nate position  ill  the  system  of  Pelagius,  but  the  doctrine  of 
freedom  is  central ;  because  in  his  view  the  primitive  state 
substantially  coincides  with  the  present,  while  freedom  is  the 
characteristic  prerogative  of  man,  as  a  moral  being,  in  all 
stages  of  his  development. 

Adam,  he  taught,  was  created  by  God  sinless,  and  entirely 
competent  to  all  good,  with  an  immortal  spirit  and  a  mortal 
body.  He  was  endowed  with  reason  and  free  will.  With  his 
reason  he  was  to  have  dominion  over  irrational  creatures ; 
with  his  free  will  he  was  to  serve  God.  Freedom  is  the 
supreme  good,  the  lienor  and  glory  of  man,  the  honum  naturce, 
that  cannot  be  lost.     It  is  the  sole  basis  of  the  ethical  relation 

*  Comp.  Miinscher,  Dogmengescbichte,  vol.  iv.  238,  and  Neander,  Dogmenge- 
Bchichte,  vol,  i.  p.  412. 


§   150.      THE   PELAGIAN   SYSTEM.  803 

of  man  to  God,  who  would  have  no  unwilling  service.  It  con- 
sists, according  to  Pelagius,  essentially  in  the  liberum  arhi- 
triiwi,  or  the  possibUitas  honi  et  mali'y  the  freedom  of  choice, 
and  the  absolutely  equal  ability  at  every  moment  to  do  good 
or  evil.'  The  ability  to  do  evil  belongs  necessarily  to  fi*eedom, 
because  we  cannot  will  good  without  at  the  same  time  being 
able  to  will  evil.  Without  this  power  of  contrary  choice,  the 
choice  of  good  itself  would  lose  its  freedom,  and  therefore  its 
moral  value.  Man  is  not  a  free,  self-determining  moral  s: ob- 
ject, until  good  and  evil,  life  and  death,  have  beeo  given  iuto 
his  hand.'' 

This  is  the  only  conception  of  freedom  which  Pelagius  has, 
and  to  this  he  and  his  followers  continually  revert.  He  views 
freedom  in  \iiforin  alone,  and  in  \i%  first  stage,  and  there  fixes 
and  leaves  it,  in  perpetual  equipoise  between  good  and  evil, 
ready  at  any  moment  to  turn  either  way.  It  is  without  past 
or  future;  absolutely  independent  of  everything  without  or 
within  ;  a  vacuum,  which  may  make  itself  a  plenum,  and  then 
becomes  a  vacuum  again ;  a  pei*petual  tabula  rasa,  upon  which 

'  De  gratia  Christi  et  de  pecc.  origin,  c.  18  (§  19,  torn.  x.  fol.  238)  where  Augus- 
tine cites  the  following  passage  from  the  treatise  of  Pelagius,  De  libero  arbitiio : 
"Habemus  possibilitatem  utriusque  partis  a  Deo  insitam,  velut  quamdam,  ut  ita 
dicam,  radicem  fructiferam  et  fecundam,  quje  ex  voluntate  hominis  diversa  gignat 
et  pariat,  et  quae  possit  ad  proprii  cultoris  arbitrium,  vel  nitere  flore  virtutum,  vel 
sentibus  horrere  vitiornm."  Against  tliis  Augustine  cites  the  declaration  of  our 
Lord,  Matt  vii.  18,  that  "  a  good  tree  cannot  bear  evil  fruit,  nor  a  corrupt  tree  good 
fruit,"  that  therefore  there  cannot  be  "una  eademque  radix  bonorum  et  malorum." 

^  Ep.  ad  Demet.  cap,  3 :  "In  hoc  enim  gemini  itineris  discrimine,  in  hoc 
utriusque  libertate  partis,  rationabilis  animaj  decus  positum  est.  Hiuc,  inquam,  totus 
naturffi  nostrse  honor  consistit,  hinc  dignitas,  hinc  denique  optimi  quique  laudem 
merentur,  hinc  prsemium.  Nee  esset  omnino  virtus  ulla  in  bono  perseverantis,  si 
is  ad  malum  transire  non  potuisset.  Volens  namque  Deus  rationabilem  creaturam 
voluntarii  boni  munere  [al.  munire]  et  hberi  arbitrii  potestate  donare,  utriusque 
partis  possibilitatem  homini  inserendo,  projOTum  ejus  fecit  esse  quod  velit,  ut  boni 
ac  mali  capax,  naturaliter  utrumque  posset,  et  ad  alterutrum  voluntatem  deflec- 
teret.  Neque  enim  aliter  spontaneum  habere  poterat  bonum,  nisi  seque  etiam  ea 
creatura  malum  habere  potuisset.  Utrumque  nos  posse  voluit  optimus  Creator,  sed 
unura  facere,  bonum  scilicet,  quod  et  imperavit ;  malique  facultatem  ad  hoc  tautum 
dedit,  ut  voluntatem  ejus  ex  nostra  voluntate  faceremus.  Quod  ut  ita  sit,  hoc 
quoque  ipsum,  quia  etiam  mala  facere  possumus,  bonum  est.  Bonum,  inquam,  quia 
boui  partem  meliorem  facit.  Facit  enim  ipsam  voluutariam  sui  juris,  non  necessitate 
devinctam,  sed  judicio  liberam." 


804  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

man  can  write  whatsoever  he  pleases;  a  restless  choice, 
■vrhicli,  after  every  decision,  reverts  to  indecision  and  oscilla- 
tion. The  human  will  is,  as  it  were,  the  eternal  Hercules  at 
the  cross-road,  who  takes  fii-st  a  step  to  the  right,  then  a  step 
to  the  left,  and  ever  returns  to  his  former  position.  Pelagius 
knows  only  the  antithesis  of  free  choice  and  constraint;  no 
stages  of  development,  no  transitions.  He  isolates  the  will 
from  its  acts,  and  the  acts  from  each  other,  and  overlooks  the 
organic  connection  between  habit  and  act.  Human  liberty, 
like  every  other  spiritual  power,  has  its  development ;  it  must 
advance  beyond  its  equilibrium,  beyond  the  mere  ability  to 
sin  or  not  to  sin,  and  decide  for  the  one  or  the  other.  When 
the  will  decides,  it  so  far  loses  its  indifference,  and  the  oftener  it 
acts,  the  more  does  it  become  fixed ;  good  or  evil  becomes  its 
habit,  its  second  nature ;  and  the  will  either  becomes  truly  free 
by  deciding  for  virtue,  and  by  practising  virtue,  or  it  becomes 
the  slave  of  vice.^  "Whosoever  committeth  sin,  is  the  servant 
of  sin."  Goodness  is  its  own  reward,  and  wickedness  is  its 
own  punishment.     Liberty  of  choice  is  not  /slower,  but  -«r  ^ 


rather  a  crude  energy,  waiting  to  assume  some 
positive  form,  to  reject  evil  and  commit  itself  to  good,  and  to 
become  a  moral  self-control,  in  which  the  choice  of  evil,  as  in 
Christ,  is  a  moral,  though  not  a  physical,  impossibility.  Its 
impulse  towards  exercise  is  also  an  impulse  towards  self-anni- 
hilation, or  at  least  towards  self-limitation.  The  right  use  of 
the  freedom  of  choice  leads  to  a  state  of  hoKness ;  the  abuse  of 
it,  to  a  state  of  bondage  under  sin.  The  state  of  the  will  is 
affected  by  its  acts,  and  settles  towards  a  permanent  character 

*  Pelagiua  himself,  it  must  be  admitted,  recognized  to  some  extent  the  power  of 
habit  and  its  effect  upon  the  will  (Ep.  ad  Demetr.  c.  8) ;  but  Coelestius  and  Julian 
carried  out  his  idea  of  the  freedom  of  choice  more  consistently  to  the  conception  of 
a  purely  qualitative'  or  formal  power  which  admits  of  no  growth  or  change  by  actual 
exercise,  but  remains  always  the  same.  Comp.  Niedner  (in  the  posthmnous  edition 
of  his  Lehrbuch  der  Kirchengeschichte,  Berlin,  1866,  p.  345  f.),  who  justly  remarks, 
in  opposition  to  Baur's  defense  of  the  Pelagian  conception  of  freedom :  "  Freedom 
in  its  first  stage,  as  the  power  of  choice,  is  a  moral  (as  well  as  a  natural)  faculty,  and 
hence  capable  of  development  either  by  way  of  deterioration  into  a  sinful  inclination, 
or  by  rising  to  a  higher  form  of  freedom.  This  is  the  point  which  Coelestius  and 
Julian  ignored :  they  attached  too  little  weight  to  the  me  of  freedom, "-v  ,^.'- 


/~4**y*wwl^ -*-*>''^*^^ 


/=^' 


^U    J^U.  Mo^^c^'^^U^   ^  ^^$.^A.w^  -^-^  ^ 


/^i 


ftrA.^  '^  ''V- 


^^/ 


X  ^.  ^^  ..^  jy^^t  ';^^:1^  -^T^id^^- 


'Tvp 


§   150.      THE   PELAGIAN    STSTEil.  805 

of  good  or  evil.  Every  act  goes  to  form  a  moral  state  or  habit ; 
and  habit  is  in  turn  the  parent  of  nevt^  acts.  Perfect  freedom 
is  one  with  moral  necessity,  in  which  man  no  longer  can  do 
evil  because  he  will  not  do  it,  and  must  do  good  because  he 
loills  to  do  it ;  in  whicli  the  finite  will  is  united  with  the  divine 
in  joyful  obedience,  and  raised  above  the  possibility  of  apos- 
tasy. This  is  the  blessed  freedom  of  the  children  of  God  in 
the  state  of  glory.  There  is,  indeed,  a  subordinate  sphere  of 
natural  virtue  and  civil  justice,  in  which  even  fallen  man 
retains  a  certain  freedom  of  choice,  and  is  the  artificer  of  his 
own  character.  But  as  respects  his  relation  to  God,  he  is  in  a 
state  of  alienation  from  God,  and  of  bondage  under  sin ;  and 
from  this  he  cannot  rise  by  his  own  strength,  by  a  bare  resolu- 
tion of  his  will,  but  only  by  a  regenerating  act  of  grace, 
received  in  humility  and  faith,  and  setting  him  free  to  practise 
Christian  virtue.  Then,  when  born  again  from  above,  the  will 
of  the  new  man  co-operates  with  the  grace  of  God,  in  the 
growth  of  the  Christian  life.' 

Physical  death  Pelagius  regarded  as  a  law  of  nature,  which 
would  have  prevailed  even  without  sin.^  The  passages  of 
Scripture  which  represent  death  as  the  consequence  of  sin,  he 
referred  to  moral  corruption  or  eternal  damnation.^  Yet  he 
conceded  that  Adam,  if  he  had  not  sinned,  might  by  a  special 
privilege  have  been  exempted  from  death. 

11.  The  Fall  of  Adam  and  its  Consequences. 

Pelagius,  destitute  of  all  idea  of  the  organic  wholeness  of 
the  race  or  of  human  nature,  viewed  Adam  merely  as  an 
isolated  individual ;  he  gave  him  no  representative  place,  and 
therefore  his  acts  no  bearing  beyond  himself. 

In  his  view,  the  sin  of  the  first  man  consisted  in  a  single, 

*  Comp.  the  thorougli  and  acute  criticism  of  the  Pelagian  conception  of  freedom 
bj, Julius  Miiller,  Die  christliche  Lehre  von  der  Siinde,  Bd.  ii.  p.  49  IF.  (3d  ed.  184 
'     ^  Coelestius  in  Marius  Mercator.     Common,  ii.  p.  133  :  "  Adam  mortalem  factum"^ 
qui  sive  peccaret,  sive  non  peccaret,  moriturus  fuisset." 

^  The  words  of  God  to  Adam,  Gen.  iii.  19  :  "Dust  thou  art,  and  imto  dust  shall 
thou  return,"  Julian  interpreted  not  as  a  curse,  but  as  a  consolation,  and  as  an  argu 
ment  for  the  natural  mortality  of  Adam,  by  straining  the  "  Dust  thou  arC  See 
August.  Opus  imperfectum  contra  Julian.  L  vi.  cap.  27  (x.  fol.  1346  sqq.). 


806  THIKD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

isolated  act  of  disobedience  to  the  divine  command.  Julian 
compares  it  to  the  insignificant  offence  of  a  child,  which  allows 
itself  to  be  misled  by  some  sensual  bait,  but  afterwards  repents 
its  fault.  "  Rude,  inexperienced,  thoughtless,  having  not  yet 
learned  to  fear,  nor  seen  an  example  of  virtue,"  '  Adam  allowed 
himself  to  be  enticed  by  the  pleasant  look  of  the  forbidden 
fruit,  and  to  be  determined  by  the  persuasion  of  the  woman. 
This  single  and  excusable  act  of  transgression  brought  no  con- 
sequences, either  to  the  soul  or  the  body  of  Adam,  still  less  to 
his  posterity,  who  all  stand  or  fall  for  themselves. 

There  is,  therefore,  according  to  this  system,  no  original 
sin,  and  no  hereditary  guilt.  Pelagius  merely  conceded,  that 
Adam,  by  his  disobedience,  set  a  l)ad  example,  which  exerts  a 
more  or  less  injurious  influence  upon  his  posterity.  In  this 
view  he  condemned  at  the  synod  of  Diospolis  (415)  the  asser- 
tion of  Coelestius,  that  Adam's  sin  injured  himself  alone,  not 
the  human  race.''  He  was  also  inclined  to  admit  an  increasing 
corruption  of  mankind,  though  he  ascribed  it  solely  to  the 
habit  of  evil,  which  grows  in  power  the  longer  it  works  and 
the  farther  it  spreads.^  Sin,  however,  is  not  born  with  man ; 
it  is  not  a  product  of  nature,  but  of  the  will.^  Man  is  born 
both  without  virtue  and  without  vice,  but  with  the  capacity 
for  either.^  The  universality  of  sin  must  be  ascribed  to  the 
power  of  evil  example  and  evil  custom. 

'  "  Rudis,  imperitus,  incautus,  sine  experimento  timoris,  siue  exemplo  justitiae." 

"  "Adse  peccatum  ipsi  soli  obfuisse,  et  non  generi  bumano;  et  infantes  qui 
uascuntur,  in  eo  statu  esse,  in  quo  fuit  Adam  ante  prsevaricationem."  In  Augus- 
tine's De  pecc.  orig.  c.  13  (f.  258). 

^  Ep.  ad  Demet.  cap.  8 :  "  Longa  consuetudo  vitiorum,  qua;  nos  infecit  a  parvo 
paulatimque  per  multos  corrupit  annos,  et  ita  postea  obligates  sibi  et  addictos  tenet, 
ut  vim  quodammodo  videatur  habere  natura."  He  also  says  of  consuetudo,  that  it 
"  aut  vitia  aut  virtutes  alit." 

*  Coelestius,  Symb.  fragm.  i. :  "In  remissionem  autem  peccatorum  baptizandos 
infantes  non  idcirco  diximus,  ut  peccatum  ex  traduce  [or,  peccatum  naturje,  pecca- 
tum naturale]  firmare  vidcamur,  quod  longe  a  catholico  sensu  alienum  est ;  quia 
peccatum  non  cum  homine  nascitur,  quod  postmodum  excrcetur  ab  homine  quia 
non  naturjB  delictum,  sed  voluntatis  esse  demonstratur." 

^  Pelagius,  in  the  first  book  of  the  Pro  libero  arbitrio,  cited  in  Augustine's  De 
pecc.  orig.  cap.  13  (§  14,  torn.  x.  f.  258):  "Omne  bonum  ac  malum,  quo  vel  lauda- 
biles  vel  vituperabiles  sumus,  non  nobiscum  oritur,  sed  agltur  a  nobis :  capaces 
enim  utriusque  rei,  non  pleni  nascimur,  ct  ut  sine  virtute,  ita  et  sine  vitio  procrea- 


A   ,.-• 


§    150.      THE   PELAGIAN   SYSTEM!.  807 

And  there  are  exceptions  to  it.  Tlie  "  all "  in  Eom.  v.  12 
is  to  be  taken  relatively  for  the  majority.  Even  before  Christ 
there  were  men  who  lived  free  from  sin,  such  as  righteous 
Abel,  Abraham,  Isaac,  the  Yirgin  Mary,  and  many  others.* 
From  the  silence  of  the  Scriptures  respecting  the  sins  of 
many  righteous  men,  he  inferred  that  such  men  were  without 
sin.'  In  reference  to  Mary,  Pelagius  is  nearer  the  present 
Koman  Catholic  view  than  Augustine,  who  exempts  her  only 
from  actual  sin,  not  from  original.^  Jerome,  with  all  his  rev- 
erence for  the  blessed  Yirgin,  does  not  even  make  this  excep- 
tion, but  says,  without  qualification,  that  every  creature  is 
under  the  power  of  sin  and  in  need  of  the  mercy  of  God." 

With  original  sin,  of  course,  hereditary  guilt  also  disap- 
pears ;  and  even  apart  from  this  connection,  Pelagius  views  it 

mur ;  atque  ante  actionem  proprias  voluntatis  id  solum  in  homine  est,  quod  Deus 
condidit."  It  is  not,  however,  very  congruous  with  this,  that  in  another  place  he 
speaks  of  a  natural  or  inborn  holiness.  Ad  Demet.  c.  4 :  "  Est  in  animis  nostris 
naturalis  quaedam,  ut  ita  dixerim,  sanctitas." 

'  Comp.  Pelagius,  Com.  in  Rom.  v.  12,  and  in  August.  De  natura  et  gratia,  cap. 
36  (§42,  Opera,  tom.  x.  fol.  144):  "Deinde  commemorat  [Pelagius]  eos,  qui  non 
modo  non  peccasse,  verum  etiam  juste  vixisse  refenmtur,  Abel,  Enoch,  Melchise- 
dech,  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob,  Jesu  Nove,  Phineas,  Samuel,  Nathan,  EUas,  Joseph, 
Elizaeus,  Micheas,  Daniel,  Ananias,  Agarias,  Meisael,  Ezechiel,  Mardochaeus,  Simeon, 
Joseph,  cui  despondata  erat  virgo  Maria,  Johannes.  Adjungit  etiam  feminas,  Deb- 
boram,  Annam,  Samuelis  matrem,  Judith,  Esther,  alteram  Annam  filiam  Phanuel, 
Elizabeth,  ipsam  etiam  Domini  ac  Salvatoris  nostri  matrem,  quam  dicit  sine  peccato 
confiteri  necesse  esse  pietati." 

^  "  De  illis,  quorum  justitias  meminit  [Scriptura  sacra]  et  peccatorum  sine  dubio 
meminisset,  si  qua  eos  peccasse  sensisset."  In  Aug.  De  nat.  et  grat.  c.  37  (§  43 ; 
tom.  X.  fol.  145). 

'  In  the  passage  cited,  Augustine  agrees  with  Pelagius  in  reference  to  Mary 
'propter  honorem  Domini,"  but  only  as  respects  actual  sin,  of  which  the  connection 
shows  him  to  be  speaking ;  for  in  other  passages  he  affirms  the  conception  of  Mary 
in  sin.  Comp.  Enarratio  in  Psalmum  xxxiv.  vs.  13  (ed.  Migne,  tom.  iv.  335): 
"  Maria  ex  Adam  mortua  propter  peccatum,  Adam  mortuus  propter  peccatum,  et 
caro  Domini  ex  Maria  mortua  est  propter  delenda  peccata."  De  Genesi  ad  literam, 
lib.  X.  c.  18  (§  32),  where  he  discusses  the  origin  of  Christ's  soul,  and  says:  "Quid 
incoiuquinatius  illo  utero  Virginis,  cujus  caro  etiamsi  de  peccaii  propagine  venit, 
non  tamen  de  peccati  propagine  coucepit  .  .  .?"     See  above,  §  80,  p.  418. 

'  Adv.  Pelag.  1.  ii.  c.  4  (tom.  ii.  744,  ed.  Vallarsi) :  "  'AvajxapT-nrov,  id  est  sine 
peccato  esse  [hominem  posse]  nego,  id  enim  soli  Deo  competit,  omnisque  creatura 
peccato  subjacet,  et  indiget  misericordia  Dei,  dicente  Scriptura:  Misericordia 
Domini  plena  est  terra." 


808  THIRD   PKBIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

as  irreconcilable  with  tlie  justice  of  God.  From  this  position 
a  necessary  deduction  is  the  salvation  of  unbaptized  infants. 
Pelagius,  however,  made  a  distinction  between  mta  CBterna^  or 
a  lower  degree  of  salvation,  and  the  regnum  cmlorum  of  the 
baptized  saints ;  and  he  affirmed  the  necessity  of  baptism  for 
entrance  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven.^ 

In  this  doctrine  of  the  fall  we  meet  with  the  same  disin- 
tegrating view  of  humanity  as  before.  Adam  is  isolated  from 
his  posterity;  his  disobedience  is  disjoined  from  other  sins. 
He  is  simply  an  individual,  like  any  other  man,  not  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  whole  race.  There  are  no  creative  starting- 
points ;  every  man  begins  history  anew.  In  this  system  Paul's 
exhibitions  of  Adam  and  Christ  as  the  representative  ancestors 
of  mankind  have  no  meaning.  If  the  act  of  the  former  has 
merely  an  individual  significance,  so  also  has  that  of  the  latter. 
If  the  sin  of  Adam  cannot  be  imputed,  neither  can  the  merit 
of  Christ.  In  both  cases  there  is  nothing  left  but  the  idea  of 
example,  the  influence  of  which  depends  solely  upon  our  own 
free  will.  But  there  is  an  undeniable  solidarity  between  the 
sin  of  the  first  man  and  that  of  his  posterity. 

In  like  manner  sin  is  here  regarded  almost  exclusively  as 
an  isolated  act  of  the  will,  while  yet  there  is  also  such  a  thing 
as  sinfulness ;  there  are  sinful  states  and  sinful  habits,  which 
are  consummated  and  strengthened  by  sins  of  act,  and  which 
in  turn  give  birth  to  other  sins  of  act. 

There  is  a  deep  truth  in  the  couplet  of  Schiller,  which  can 
easily  be  divested  of  its  fatalistic  intent : 

"  This  is  the  very  curse  of  evil  deed, 
That  of  new  evil  it  becomes  the  seed."  ' 

Finally,  the  essence  and  root  of  sin  is  not  sensuality,  as 
Pelagius  was  inclined  to  assume  (though  he  did  not  express 
himself  very  definitely  on  this  point),  but  self-seeking,  includ- 
ing pride  and  sensuality  as  the  two  main  forms  of  sin.     The 

'  August.  De  peccatorum  meritis  et  rcmissione,  lib.  i.  c.  21  (§  30,  torn.  x.  f.  17); 
De  haeresibus,  cap.  88. 

'  "  Das  eben  ist  der  Fluch  der  bosen  That, 

Dass  sie,  fortzeugend,  immer  Boses  muss  gebaren." 


§   151.      THE   PELAGIAN   SrSTEM   CONTINUED.  809 

sin  of  Satan  was  a  pride  that  aimed  at  equality  with  God ; 
rebellion  against  God ;  and  in  this  the  fall  of  Adam  began, 
and  was  inwardly  consummated  before  he  ate  of  the  forbidden 
fruit. 


§  151.     The  Pelagian  System  Continued :   Doctrine  of 
Human  Ability  and  Divine  Grace. 

III.  The  PRESENT  MORAL  CONDITION  of  man  is,  according  to 
the  Pelagian  system,  in  all  respects  the  same  as  that  of  Adam 
before  the  fall.  Every  child  is  born  with  the  same  moral 
powers  and  capabilities  with  which  the  first  man  was  created 
by  God.  For  the  freedom  of  choice,  as  we  have  already  seen, 
is  not  lost  by  abuse,  and  is  altogether  the  same  in  heathens, 
Jews,  and  Christians,  except  that  in  Christians  it  is  aided  by 
grace.'  Pelagius  was  a  creationist,  holding  that  the  body 
alone  is  derived  from  the  parents,  and  that  every  soul  is  created 
directly  by  God,  and  is  therefore  sinless.  The  sin  of  the  father, 
inasmuch  as  it  consists  in  isolated  acts  of  will,  and  does  not 
inhere  in  the  nature,  has  no  influence  upon  the  child.  The 
only  difference  is,  that,  in  the  first  place,  Adam's  posterity  are 
born  children,  and  not,  like  him,  created  full-grown ;  and  sec- 
ondly, they  have  before  them  the  bad  example  of  his  dis- 
obedience, which  tempts  them  more  or  less  to  imitation,  and 
to  the  influence  of  which  by  far  the  most — but  not  all^-suc- 
cumb. 

Julian  often  appeals  to  the  virtues  of  the  heathen,  such  as 
valor,  chastity,  and  temperance,  in  proof  of  the  natural  good- 
ness of  human  nature. 

He  looked  at  the  matter  of  moral  action  as  such,  and  judged 
it  accordingly.  "  If  the  chastity  of  the  heathen,"  he  objects 
to  Augustine's  view  of  the  corrupt  nature  of  heathen  virtue, 
"  were  no  chastity,  then  it  might  be  said  with  the  same  pro- 
priety that  the  bodies  of  unbelievers  are  no  bodies  5  that  the 

'  Pelagius,  in  Aug.  De  gratia  Christi,  c.  31  (x.  244):  "Liberi  arbitrii  potestatem 
dieimus  in  omnibus  esse  generaliter,  in  Christianis,  Judaeis  atque  gentilibus.  In 
omnibus  est  liberum  arbitrium  aequaliter  per  naturam,  sed  in  solis  Cliristianis  juva- 
tar  gratia." 


810  THIED   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

eyes  of  tlie  lieathen  could  not  see ;  that  grain  wliicli  grew  in 
their  fields  was  no  grain." 

Augustine  justly  ascribed  the  value  of  a  moral  act  to  the 
inward  disposition  or  the  direction  of  the  will,  and  judged  it 
from  the  unity  of  the  whole  life  and  according  to  the  standard 
of  love  to  God,  which  is  the  soul  of  all  true  virtue,  and  is  be- 
stowed upon  us  only  through  grace.  He  did  not  deny  alto- 
gether the  existence  of  natural  virtues,  such  as  moderation, 
lenity,  benevolence,  generosity,  which  proceed  from  the  Crea- 
tor, and  also  constitute  a  certain  merit  among  men;  but  he 
drew  a  broad  line  of  distinction  between  them  and  the  specific 
Christian  graces,  which  alone  are  good  in  the  proper  sense  of 
the  word,  and  alone  have  value  before  God. 

The  Holy  Scriptures,  history,  and  Christian  experience,  by 
no  means  warrant  such  a  favorable  view  of  the  natural  moral 
condition  of  man  as  the  Pelagian  system  teaches.  On  the 
contrary,  they  di'aw  a  most  gloomy  picture  of  fearful  corrup- 
tion and  universal  inclination  to  all  evil,  which  can  only  be 
overcome  by  the  intervention  of  divine  grace.  Tet  Augus- 
tine also  touches  an  extreme,  when,  on  a  false  application 
of  the  passage  of  St.  Paul :  "  Whatsoever  is  not  of  faith,  is 
sin  "  (Rom.  xiv.  23),  he  ascribes  all  the  virtues  of  the  heathen 
to  ambition  and  love  of  honor,  and  so  stigmatizes  them  as 
vices.'  And  in  fact  he  is  in  this  inconsistent  with  himself. 
For,  according  to  his  view,  the  nature  which  God  created, 
remains,  as  to  its  substance,  good;  the  divine  image  is  not 
wholly  lost,  but  only  defaced ;  and  even  man's  sorrow  in  his 
loss  reveals  a  remaining  trace  oi'  good.^ 

Pelagius  distinguishes  three  elements  in  the  idea  of  good : 
poioer,  will,  and  act  {jposse,  velle,  and  esse).  The  first  apper- 
tains to  man's  nature,  the  second  to  his  free  will,  the  third  to 
his  conduct.     The  power  or  ability  to  do  good,  the  ethical 

'  De  civit.  Dei,  v.  13-20  and  xix.  25.  In  the  latter  place  he  calls  the  vh-tues, 
which  do  not  come  from  true  religion,  vices.  "  Virtutes  .  .  .  nisi  ad  Deum  retule- 
rit,  etiam  ipsa  vitia  sunt  potius  quam  virtutes.^''  From  this  is  doubtless  derived  the 
sentence  so  often  attributed  to  Augustine:  "The  virtues  of  the  heathen  are  splendid 
vices,"  which,  however,  in  this  form  and  generality,  does  not,  to  my  knowledge, 
occur  in  his  writings.     More  on  this  point,  see  below,  §  156. 

'  De  Genesi  ad  lit.  viii.  14 ;  Retract,  ii.  24.     Comp.  Wiggers,  i.  p.  120  flf. 


§  151.   THE  PELAGIAN  SYSTEM  CONTINUED.       811 

constitution,  is  grace,  and  comes  therefore  from  God,  as  an 
original  endowment  of  the  nature  of  man.  It  is  the  condition 
of  volition  and  action,  though  it  does  not  necessarily  produce 
them.  Willing  and  acting  belong  exclusively  to  man  himself.' 
The  power  of  speech,  of  thought,  of  sight,  is  God's  gift ;  but 
wliether  we  shall  really  think,  speak,  or  see,  and  whether  we 
shall  think,  speak,  or  see  well  or  ill,  depends  upon  our- 
selves.'' 

Here  the  nature  of  man  is  mechanically  sundered  from  his 
will  and  act ;  and  the  one  is  referred  exclusively  to  God,  the 
others  to  man.  Moral  ability  does  not  exist  over  and  above 
the  will  and  its  acts,  but  in  them,  and  is  increased  by  exercise ; 
and  thus  its  growth  depends  upon  man  himself.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  divine  help  is  mdispensable  even  to  the  willing  and 
doing  of  good ;  for  God  works  in  us  both  to  will  and  to  do.' 
The  Pelagian  system  is  founded  unconsciously  upon  the  deistic 
conception  of  the  world  as  a  clock,  made  and  wound  up  by 
God,  and  then  running  of  itself,  and  needing  at  most  some 
subsequent  repairs.  God,  in  this  system,  is  not  the  omnipres- 
ent and  everywhere  working  Upholder  and  Governor  of  the 
world,  in  whom  the  creation  lives  and  moves  and  has  its  being, 
but  a  more  or  less  passive  spectator  of  the  operation  of  the 
universe.''     Jerome    therefore    fairly   accuses    the    Pelagians 

'  Pelagius,  Pro  libero  arbitrio,  cited  in  Augustine's  De  gratia  Christi,  c.  4  (§  5, 
torn.  X.  fol.  232):  '^  Fosse  in  natura,  velle  in  arbitrio,  esse  in  effectu  locamus.  Pri- 
mum  illud,  id  est  posse,  ad  Deum  proprie  pertinet,  qui  illud  creaturae  suae  contulit, 
duo  vero  reliqua,  hoc  est  velle  et  esse,  ad  hominem  referenda  sunt,  quia  de  arbitrii 
fonte  descendunt.  Ergo  in  voluntate  et  opere  bono  laus  hominis  est:  immo  et 
hominis  et  Dei,  qui  ipsius  voluntatis  et  operis  possibilitatem  dedit,  quique  ipsam 
possibilitatem  gratis  suse  adjuvat  semper  auxilio." 

'  "Quod  possumus  videre  oculis,  nostrum  non  est:  quod  vero  bene  aut  male 
videmus,  hoc  nostnun  est.  .  .  .  Quod  loqui  possumus,  Dei  est :  quod  vero  bene 
vel  male  loquimur,  nostrum  est."  Quoted  in  Augustine's  De  gratia  Christi,  c.  15 
and  16  (fol.  237  and  238).  Augustine  cites  against  these  examples  Ps.  cxix.  37 : 
"  Averte  oculos  meos,  ne  videant  vanitatem." 

'  Pbii.  ii.  13.  Augustine  appeals  to  this  passage,  De  gratia  Christi,  c.  5  (f.  232 
sq.)  with  great  emphasis,  as  if  Paul  with  prophetic  eye  had  had  in  view  the  error  of 
Pelagius. 

*  It  is  against  this  deistic  view  that  the  pregnant  lines  of  Goethe  are  directed : 
"  Was  war'  ein  Gott,  der  nur  von  aussen  etiesse, 
Im  Kreis  das  All  am  Finger  laufen  liesse ; 


812  THIED  PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

(witliout  naming  tliem)  of  denying  the  absolute  dependence 
of  man  on  God,  and  cites  against  tliem  the  declaration  of 
Christ,  John  v.  IT,  concerning  the  uninterrupted  actiWty  of 
God.' 

TV.  The  doctrine  of  the  grace  of  God. 

The  sufficiency  of  the  natural  reason  and  "will  of  man 
would  seem  to  make  supernatural  revelation  and  grace  super- 
fluous. But  this  Pelagius  does  not  admit.  Besides  the 
natural  grace,  as  we  may  call  his  concreated  ability,  he  as- 
sumes also  a  siipernatwral  grace,  which  through  revelation 
enlightens  the  understanding,  and  assists  man  to  will  and  to 
do  what  is  good.*  This  grace  confers  the  negative  benefit  of 
the  forgiveness  of  past  sins,  or  justification,  which  Pelagius 
understands  in  the  Protestant  sense  of  declaring  righteous,  and 
not  (like  Augustine)  in  the  Catholic  sense  oi making  righteous ; ' 

Hini  ziemt's,  die  Welt  im  Innern  zu  bewegen, 
Natur  in  sich,  sich  in  Natur  zu  hegen, 
So  dass,  was  in  ihm  lebt  und  webt  und  ist, 
Nie  seine  Kraft,  nie  seinen  Geist  vermisst." 

"  What  were  a  God  wlio  only  from  without 
Upon  his  finger  whirled  the  universe  about  ? 
'Tis  his  within  itself  to  move  the  creature ; 
Nature  in  him  to  warm,  himself  in  nature ; 
So  that  what  in  him  hves  and  moves  and  is, 
Shall  ever  feel  some  Uving  breath  of  his." 

*  Epistola  ad  Ctesiphontem.  Dr.  Neander  (Church  History,  vol.  ii.  p.  604  ff. 
Torrey's  transl.)  regards  this  difference  of  view  concerning  the  relation  of  the  Crea- 
tor to  the  creature  as  the  most  original  and  fundamental  difference  between  the 
Augustinian  and  Pelagian  system,  although  it  did  not  clearly  come  to  view  in  the 
progress  of  the  controversy. 

^  Pelagius,  in  Aug.  De  gratia  Christi,  c.  T  (§  8,  x.  f.  233):  "...  Deus  .  .  . 
gratise  suae  auxihum  subministrat,  ut  quod  per  Uberum  homines  facere  jubentur 
arbitrium,  facilius  possent  implere  per  gratiam." 

^  Pelag.  Com.  in  Rom.  iv.  6  :  "Ad  hoc  fides  prima  ad  justitiam  reputatur,  ut  de 
praeterito  absolvatur  et  de  praesenti  justificatur,  et  ad  futura  fidei  opera  prjeparatur." 
Similarly  Julian  of  Eclanum.  Augustine,  on  the  contrary,  has  the  evangelical  con- 
ception of  faith  and  of  grace,  but  not  of  justification,  which  he  interprets  subjec- 
tively as  a  progressive  making  righteous,  like  the  Roman  church.  Comp.  De  gratia 
Christi,  c.  47  (§  52,  x.  f.  251):  "...  gratiam  Dei  ...  in  qua  no3  sua,  non  nostras 
justitire  justos  facit,  ut  ea  sit  vera  nostra  justitia  quae  nobis  ab  illo  est."  In  an- 
other passage,  however,  he  seems  to  express  the  Protestant  view.    De  spir.  et  lit.  c. 


§   151.      THE   PELAGIAJ^   SYSTEM   CONTmUED.  813 

and  the  positive  benefit  of  a  strengthening  of  the  will  by  the 
power  of  instruction  and  example.  As  we  have  been  follow- 
ers of  i\.dam  in  sin,  so  should  we  become  imitators  of  Christ  in 
vii'tue.  "  In  those  not  Christians,"  says  Pelagius,  "  good  exists 
in  a  condition  of  nakedness  and  helplessness ;  but  in  Christians 
it  acquires  vigor  through  the  assistance  of  Christ."  '  He  dis- 
tinguishes different  stages  of  development  in  grace  correspond- 
ing to  the  increasing  corruption  of  mankind.  At  first,  he 
says,  men  lived  righteous  by  nature  (justitia  per  naturam), 
then  righteous  under  the  law  (justitia  sub  lege),  and  finally 
righteous  under  grace  (justitia  gratise),  or  the  gospel.''  When 
the  inner  law,  or  the  conscience,  no  longer  sufficed,  the  out- 
ward or  Mosaic  law  came  in ;  and  when  this  failed,  through 
the  overmastering  habit  of  sinning,  it  had  to  be  assisted  by  the 
view  and  imitation  of  the  virtue  of  Christ,  as  set  forth  in  his 
example.^  Julian  of  Eclanum  also  makes  kinds  and  degrees 
of  the  grace  of  God.  The  first  gift  of  grace  is  our  creation  out 
of  nothing ;  the  second,  our  rational  soul ;  the  third,  the  writ- 
ten law ;  the  fourth,  the  gospel,  with  all  its  benefits.  In  the 
gift  of  the  Son  of  God  grace  is  completed.* 

Grace  is  therefore  a  useful  external  help  (adjutorium)  to 
the  development  of  the  powers  of  nature,  but  is  not  absolutely 
necessary.  Coelestius  laid  down  the  proposition,  that  grace 
is  not  given  for  single  acts.^  Pelagius,  it  is  true,  condemned 
those  who  deny  that  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ  is  necessary 
for  every  moment  and  every  act ;  but  tliis  point  was  a  conces- 

26  (§  45,  torn.  x.  109) :  "  Certe  ita  dictum  est :  justificahuntur,  ac  si  diceretur : 
justi  habebunfur,  justi  depufabuniur,  sicut  dictum  est  de  quodam :  JUe  autem  volens 
sejustificare  (Luc.  x.  29),  i.  e.,  ut  Justus  haberetur  et  deputaretur." 

'  In  Aug.  De  gratia  Chr.  c.  31  (torn.  x.  fol.  244) :  "  In  illis  nudum  et  inerme  est 
conditionis  bonum ;  in  his  vero  qui  ad  Christum  pertinent,  Christi  munitur 
auxilio." 

"  Aug.  De  pecc.  orig.  c.  26  (§  30,  tom.  x.  f.  266) :  "  Non,  sicut  Pelagius  et  ejus 
discipuli,  tempora  dividamus  dicentes :  prlmum  vizisse  Justos  homines  ex  natura, 
deinde  stib  lege,  tertio  sub  gratia.''^ 

'  Cited  from  Pelagius,  1.  c. :  "  Postquam  nimia,  sicut  disputant,  peccandi  con- 
euetudo  prsevaluit,  cui  sanandae  lex  parum  valeret,  Christus  advenit  et  tanquam 
morbo  desperatissimo  non  per  discipulos,  sed  per  se  ipsum  medicus  ipse  subvenit." 

*  In  Augustine's  Opus  imperf.  i.  94  (tom.  x.  f.  928) 

*  "  Gratiam  Dei  et  adjutorium  non  ad  siugulos  actus  dari." 


814  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

sion  wrung  from  him  in  tlie  controversy,  and  does  not  follow 
logically  from  his  premises/ 

Grace  moreover,  according  to  Pelagius,  is  intended  for  all 
men  (not,  as  Augustine  taught,  for  the  elect  few  only),  but  it  must 
first  be  deserved.  This,  however,  really  destroys  its  freedom.* 
"  The  heathen,"  he  says,  "  are  liable  to  judgment  and  damna- 
tion, because  they,  notwithstanding  their  free  will,  by  which 
they  are  able  to  attain  unto  faith  and  to  deserve  God's  grace, 
make  an  evil  use  of  the  freedom  bestowed  upon  them ;  Chris- 
tians, on  the  other  hand,  are  worthy  of  reward,  because  they 
through  good  use  of  freedom  deserve  the  grace  of  God,  and 
keep  his  commandments."  ^ 

Pelagianism,  therefore,  extends  the  idea  of  grace  too  far, 
making  it  include  human  nature  itself  and  the  Mosaic  law ; 
while,  on  the  other  hand,  it  unduly  restricts  the  specifically 
Christian  grace  to  the  force  of  instruction  and  example.  Christ 
is  indeed  the  Supreme  Teacher,  and  the  Perfect  Example,  but 
He  is  also  High-priest  and  King,  and  the  Author  of  a  new 
spiritual  creation.  Had  He  been  merely  a  teacher.  He  would 
not  have  been  specifically  distinct  from  Moses  and  Socrates,  and 
could  not  have  redeemed  mankind  from  the  guilt  and  bondage 
of  sin.  Moreover,  He  does  not  merely  influence  believers  from 
without,  but  lives  and  works  in  them  through  the  Holy  Ghost, 
as  the  principle  of  their  spiritual  life.     Hence  Augustine's  wish 

'  Comp.,  respecting  this,  Augustine,  De  gratia  Christi,  cap.  2  (torn.  s.  fol.  229 
Bq.). 

"  Comp.  Rom.  iv.  4,  5 ;  Eph.  ii.  8,  9.  Shakespeare  has  far  better  understood 
the  nature  of  grace  than  Pelagius,  in  the  famous  speech  of  Portia  in  the  Merchant 
of  Venice  (Act  IV.  Sc.  1): 

"  The  quality  of  mercy  is  not  strained : 
It  droppeth  as  the  gentle  rain  from  heaven 
Upon  the  place  beneath ;  it  is  twice  blessed, 
It  blesseth  him  that  gives  and  him  that  takes." 
^  Pelagius  in  Aug.  De  gratia  Chr.  c.  31  (x.  f.  245).     The  illi,  according  to  the 
connection,  must  refer  to  those  not  Christians,  the  hi  to  Christians.     Yet  according 
to  his  principles  we  might  in  turn  fairly  subdivide  each  class,  since  accordmg  to  him 
there  are  good  heathens  and  bad  Christians     Against  this  Augustine  urges :  "  Ubi 
est  iUud  apostoli :  Justificati  gratis  per  gratiam  ipsius  (Rom.  iii.  24)  ?     Ubi  est  illud ' 
Gratia  salvi  facti  estis  (Eph.  ii.  8)  ? "    He  concludes  with  the  just  proposition :  "  Nod 
est  gratia,  nisi  gratuita." 


§   151.      THE  PELAGIAN   SYSTEM   CONTINUED.  815 

for  bis  opponent:  ""Would  that  Pelagius  might  confess  that 
grace  which  not  merely  promises  ns  the  excellence  of  futm'e 
glory,  but  also  brings  forth  in  us  the  faith  and  hope  of  it ;  a 
grace,  which  not  merely  admonishes  to  all  good,  but  also  from 
within  inclines  us  thereto;  not  merely  reveals  wisdom,  but 
also  inspires  us  with  the  love  of  wisdom."  *  This  superficial 
conception  of  grace  is  inevitable,  with  the  Pelagian  conception 
of  sin.  If  human  nature  is  imcorrupted,  and  the  natural  will 
competent  to  all  good,  we  need  no  Redeemer  to  create  in  us  a 
new  will  and  a  new  life,  but  merely  an  improver  and  ennobler ; 
and  salvation  is  essentially  the  work  of  man.  The  Pelagian 
system  has  really  no  place  for  the  ideas  of  redemption,  atone- 
ment, regeneration,  and  new  creation.  It  substitutes  for  them 
our  own  moral  efibrt  to  perfect  our  natural  powers,  and  the 
mere  addition  of  the  grace  of  God  as  a  valuable  aid  and  sup- 
port. It  was  only  by  a  happy  inconsistency,  that  Pelagius 
and  his  adherents  traditionally  held  to  the  church  doctrines  of 
the  Trinity  and  the  person  of  Christ.  Logically  their  system 
led  to  a  rationalistic  Christology.*  , 

Pelagianism  is  a  fundamental  anthropological  heresy, 
denying  man's  need  of  redemption,  and  answering  to  the 
Ebionistic  Christology,  which  rejects  the  divinity  of  Christ. 
It  is  the  opposite  of  Manichseism,  which  denies  man's  capability 
of  redemption,  and  which  corresponds  to  the  Gnostic  denial  of 
the  true  humanity  of  Christ.^ 

'  De  gratia  Christi,  c.  10  (torn.  x.  f.  235). 

'  Wiggers,  1.  c.  vol.  i.  p.  457,  judges  similarly.  Also  Neander,  in  his  Dogmen- 
gcschichte,  Bd.  i.  p.  384 :  "  The  Pelagian  principles  would  logically  have  led  to 
rationalistic  views,  to  an  entire  rejection  of  the  supernatural  element,  and  to  the 
belief  that  mankind  needs  only  to  develop  itself  from  within  itself,  without  the 
revelation  and  self-impartation  of  God,  in  order  to  attain  the  good.  But  they  do 
not  develop  their  first  principles  so  consistently  as  this,  and  what  Biblical  elements 
they  incorporate  with  their  system  are  unquestionably  not  taken  in  merely  by  way 
of  accommodation,  but  through  the  persuasion  that  a  supernatural  revelation  is 
necessary,  in  order  to  realize  the  destiny  of  mankind."  Comp.  Cunningham,  Hist. 
Theology,  i.  p.  329:  "Modern  Socinians  and  Rationalists  are  the  only  consistent 
Pelagians.  When  men  reject  what  Pelagius  rejected,  they  are  bound  in  consistency 
to  reject  everytldng  that  is  peculiar  and  distinctive  in  the  Ghriatian  systoft  as  a  reme-    .  y     ^ 

dial  scheme."    'JVji-t.--  ■    7  ^^  .^  tf^>?^«.wfc«   T^^ij^t  X*^^'0'y^  ^oi^ 

'  Comp.  Augustine,  Contra  duas  Epist.  Pelagianorum,  1.  ii.  c.  2,  where  he  de-       fi^l-<^^t4t/1^ 


816  TKCBD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

§  152.     The  Augustinian  System :    The  Primitive  State  of 
Man,  and  Free  Will. 

Augustine  (364-430)  had  already  in  his  Confessions,  in  the 
year  400,  ten  years  before  the  commencement  of  the  Pelagian 
controversy,  set  forth  his  deep  and  rich  experiences  of  human 
sin  and  divine  grace.  This  classical  autobiography,  which 
every  theological  student  should  read,  is  of  universal  applica- 
tion, and  in  it  every  Christian  may  bewail  his  own  wanderings, 
despair  of  himself,  throw  himself  unconditionally  into  the  arms 
of  God,  and  lay  hold  upon  unmerited  grace.'  Augustine  had 
in  his  own  life  passed  through  all  the  earlier  stages  of  the 
history  of  the  church,  and  had  overcome  in  theory  and  in 
practice  the  heresy  of  Manichteism,  before  its  opposite,  Pela- 
gianism,  appeared.  By  his  theological  refutation  of  this  latter 
heresy,  and  by  his  clear  development  of  the  Biblical  anthro- 
pology, he  has  won  the  noblest  and  most  lasting  renown.  As 
in  the  events  recorded  in  his  Confessions  he  gives  views  of  the 
evangelical  doctrines  of  sin  and  of  gtace,  so  in  the  doctrines 
of  his  anti-Pelagian  writings  he  sets  forth  his  personal  expe- 
rience. He  teaches  nothing  which  he  has  not  felt.  In  him 
the  philosopher  and  the  living  Christian  are  everywhere  fused. 
His  loftiest  metaphysical  speculation  passes  unconsciously  into 
adoration.  The  living  aroma  of  personal  experience  imparts 
to  his  views  a  double  interest,  and  an  irresistible  attraction  for 
all  earnest  minds.* 

scribes  Manichaeism  and  Pelagianism  at  length  as  the  two  opposite  extremes,  and 
opposes  to  them  the  Catholic  doctrine. 

*  An  ingenious  but  somewhat  far-fetched  parallel  is  drawn  by  Dr.  Kleinert  be- 
tween Augustine  and  Faust,  as  two  antipodal  representatives  of  mankind,  in  a 
brochure:  Augustin  und  Goethe's  Faust,  Berlin,  1866.  A  more  obvious  compari- 
son is  that  of  the  Confessions  of  Augustine  with  the  Confessions  of  Eousseau,  and 
with  Goethe's  Wahrheit  und  Dichtung. 

"  Dr.  Baur,  in  his  posthumous  Vorlesungen  iiber  die  Dogmengeschichte,  pub- 
lished by  his  son  (1866,  Bd.  i.  P.  ii.  p.  26),  makes  the  fine  remark  respecting  him: 
"With  Augustine  himself  everything  lies  in  the  individuality  of  his  nature,  as  it  was 
shaped  by  the  course  of  his  life,  by  his  experiences  and  circumstances."  He  should 
have  added,  however,  that  in  so  magnificent  a  personality  as  Augustine's,  that 
which  is  most  individual  is  also  the  most  universal,  and  the  most  subjective  is  the 
most  objective. 


§    152.      THE   AUGUSTINIAN   SYSTEM.  817 

Yet  his  system  was  not  always  precisely  the  same ;  it  be- 
came perfect  only  through  personal  conflict  and  practical 
tests.  Many  of  his  earlier  views — e.  g.,  respecting  the  free- 
dom of  choice,  and  respecting  faith  as  a  work  of  man — he 
himself  abandoned  in  his  Eetractations ; '  and  hence  he  is  by 
no  means  to  be  taken  as  an  infallible  guide.  He  holds,  more- 
over, the  evangelical  doctrines  of  sin  and  grace  not  in  the 
Protestant  sense,  but,  like  his  faithful  disciples,  the  Jansenists, 
in  connection  with  the  sacramental  and  strict  churchly  system 
of  Catholicism ;  he  taught  the  necessity  of  baptismal  regenera- 
tion and  the  damnation  of  all  unbaptized  children,  and  identi- 
fied justification  in  substance  with  sanctification,  though  he 
made  sanctification  throughout  a  work  of  free  grace,  and  not 
of  human  merit.  It  remains  the  exclusive  prerogative  of  the 
inspired  apostles  to  stand  above  the  circumstances  of  their 
time,  and  never,  in  combating  one  error,  to  fall  into  its  oppo- 
site. Nevertheless,  Augustine  is  the  brightest  star  in  the 
constellation  of  the  church  fathers,  and  difi'uses  his  light 
through  the  darkest  periods  of  the  middle  ages,  and  among 
Catholics  and  Protestants  alike,  even  to  this  day.^ 

His  anthropology  may  be  exhibited  under  the  three  stages 
of  the  religious  development  of  mankind,  the  status  integrita- 
tis,  the  status  corruptionis,  and  the  status  redemtionis. 

I.  The  Primitive  State  of  man,  or  the  State  of  Inno- 
cence. 

Augustine's  conception  of  paradise  is  vastly  higher  than 
the  Pelagian,  and  involves  a  far  deeper  fall  and  a  far  more 

'  Retract.  1.  i.  c.  9. 

"  Baur,  1.  c.  p.  32  f. :  "From  the  time  that  Augustine  directed  the  development 
of  the  Christian  system  to  the  two  doctrines  of  sin  and  grace,  this  tendency 
always  remained  in  the  Occidental  dogmatics  the  prevailing  one,  and  so  great  and 
increasingly  predominant  in  the  course  of  time  did  the  authority  of  Augustine 
become  in  the  church,  that  even  those  who  had  departed  from  his  genuine  teachings, 
which  many  were  unwilling  to  follow  out  with  rigid  consistency,  yet  believed  them- 
selves bound  to  appeal  to  his  authority,  which  his  writings  easily  gave  them  oppor- 
tunity to  do,  since  his  system,  as  the  result  of  periods  of  development  so  various, 
and  antitheses  so  manifold,  offers  very  different  sides,  from  which  it  can  be  inter- 
preted." 

VOL.  II. — 52 


818  TKCRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

glorious  manifestation  of  redeeming  grace.  The  fii'st  state  of 
man  resembles  tlie  state  of  the  blessed  in  heaven,  thoiis-h  it 
differs  from  that  final  state  as  the  undeveloped  germ  from  the 
perfect  fruit.  According  to  Augustine  man  came  from  the 
hand  of  his  Maker,  his  genuine  masterpiece,  without  the 
slightest  fault.  He  possessed  freedom,  to  do  good ;  reason,  to 
know  God ;  and  the  grace  of  God.  But  bj  this  grace  Augus- 
tine (not  happy  in  the  choice  of  his  term)  means  only  the  gen- 
eral supernatm'al  assistance  indispensable  to  a  creature,  that 
he  may  persevere  in  good.'  The  relation  of  man  to  God  was 
that  of  joyful  and  perfect  obedience.  The  relation  of  the  body 
to  the  soul  was  the  same.  The  flesh  did  not  yet  lust  against 
the  spirit ;  both  were  in  perfect  harmony,  and  the  flesh  was 
wholly  subject  to  the  spirit.  "Tempted  and  assailed  by  no 
strife  of  himself  against  himself,  Adam  enjoyed  in  that  place 
the  blessedness  of  peace  with  himself."  To  this  inward  state, 
the  outward  corresponded.  The  paradise  was  not  only  spir- 
itual, but  also  visible  and  material,  without  heat  or  cold,  with- 
out weariness  or  excitement,  without  sickness,  pains,  or  defects 
of  any  kind.  The  Augustinian,  like  the  old  Protestant, 
delineations  of  the  perfection  of  Adam  and  the  blissfuliiess  of 
paradise  often  exceed  the  sober  standard  of  Holy  Scripture, 
and  borrow  their  colors  in  part  from  the  heavenly  paradise  of 
the  future,  which  can  never  be  lost.^ 

'  Grace,  in  this  wider  sense,  as  source  of  all  good,  Augustine  makes  independent 
of  sin,  and  ascribes  the  possession  of  it  even  to  the  good  angels.  Comp.  De 
corrupt,  et  grat.  §32  (torn.  x.  V67,  768):  "Dederat  [Deus  homini]  adjutorium  sine 
quo  in  ea  [bona  voluntate]  non  posset  permanere  si  vellet ;  ut  autem  vellet,  in  ejus 
libero  reliquit  arbitrio.  Posset  ergo  permanere  si  vellet :  quia  non  deerat  adjutori- 
um per  quod  posset  et  sine  quo  non  posset  perseveranter  bonum  tenere  quod  vellet. 
...  Si  autem  hoc  adjutorium  vel  angelo  vel  homini,  cum  primum  facti  sunt,  defuis- 
set,  quoniam  non  talis  natura  facta  erat,  ut  sine  divino  adjutorio  posset  manere  si 
veUet,  non  utique  sua  culpa  cecidissent:  adjutorium  quippe  defuisset,  sine  quo 
manere  non  possent."  We  see  here  plainly  the  germ  of  the  scholastic  and  Roman 
Catholic  doctrine  of  the  justitia  originalis,  which  was  ascribed  to  the  first  man  as  a 
special  endowment  of  divine  grace  or  a  supernatural  accident,  on  the  ground  of  the 
familiar  distinction  between  the  imago  Dei  (which  belongs  to  the  essence  of  man  and 
consists  in  reason  and  free  will)  and  the  similitudo  Dei  (the  actual  conformity  to 
the  divine  will). 

^  Comp.  several  passages  in  the  Opus  imperf.  i.  71 ;  iii.  147;  vi.  9,  17;  Contra 
Jul.  V.  5  ;  De  civitate  Dei,  xiii.  1,  13, 14,  21 ;  xiv.  10,  where  he  depicts  the  beatitudo 


§   152.      THE   AUGUSTINLLN"   SYSTEM.  819 

Yet  Augustine  admits  that  the  original  state  of  man  ^vas 
only  relatively  perfect,  perfect  in  its  kind ;  as  a  child  may  be 
a  perfect  child,  ■vrhile  he  is  destined  to  become  a  man ;  or  as 
the  seed  fulfils  its  idea  as  seed,  though  it  has  yet  to  become  a 
tree.  God  alone  is  immutable  and  absolutely  good ;  man  is  sub- 
ject to  development  in  time,  and  therefore  to  change.  The 
primal  gifts  were  bestowed  on  man  simply  as  powers,  to  be 
developed  in  either  one  of  two  ways.  Adam  could  go  straight 
forward,  develop  himself  harmoniously  in  untroubled  un'ty 
with  God,  and  thus  gradually  attain  his  final  perfection ;  or  he 
could  fall  away,  engender  evil  ex  nihilo  by  abuse  of  his  free 
will,  and  develop  himself  through  discords  and  contradictions. 
It  was  graciously  made  possible  that  his  mind  should  become 
incapable  of  error,  his  will,  of  sin,  his  body,  of  death ;  and  by 
a  normal  growth  this  possibility  would  have  become  actual. 
But  this  was  mere  possibility,  involving,  in  the  nature  of  the 
case,  the  023posite  possibility  of  error,  sin,  and  death. 

Augustine  makes  the  important  distinction  between  the 
possibility  of  not  sinning^  and  the  impossibility  of  sinning.^ 
The  former  is  conditional  or  potential  fi-eedom  from  sin,  which 
may  turn  into  its  opposite,  the  bondage  of  sin.  This  belonged 
to  man  before  the  fall.  The  latter  is  the  absolute  freedom 
from  sin  or  the  perfected  holiness,  which  belongs  to  God,  to 

and  deliciffi  of  Eden  in  poetic  colors,  and  extends  the  perfection  even  to  the  animal 
and  vegetable  realms.  Yet  he  is  not  everywhere  consistent.  His  views  became 
more  exaggerated  from  his  opposition  to  Pelagianism.  In  the  treatise,  De  hbero 
arbitrio,  iii.  c.  24,  §§  71,  72,  which  he  completed  a.  d.  395,  he  says,  that  the  first  human 
beings  were  neither  wise  nor  foolish,  but  had  at  first  only  the  capability  to  i)ecome 
one  or  the  other.  "Infans  nee  stultus  nee  sapiens  dici  potest,  quam^is  jam  homo  L/ 
sit ;  ex  quo  apparet  naturam  homiais  recipere  aUquid  medium,  quod  neque  stulti- 
tiam  neque  sapientiam  recte  vocaris."  .  .  .  "Ita  factus  est  homo,  ut  quamvis 
sapiens  nondum  esset,  preeceptum  tamen  posset  accipere."  On  the  other  hand,  in 
his  much  later  Opus  imperf.  c.  Juhanum,  1.  v.  c.  1  (torn.  x.  f.  1222)  he  ascribes  to 
the  first  man  excellentissima  sapientia,  appealing  to  Pythagoras,  who  is  said  to  have 
declared  him  the  wisest,  who  first  gave  names  to  things. 

'  Posse  non  peccare,  which  at  the  same  time  implies  the  possibiUtas  peccandi. 
Comp.  Opus  imperf.  v.  60  (fol.  1278) :  "  Prorsus  ita  factus  est,  ut  peccandi  possibi- 
Utatem  haberet  a  necessario,  peccatum  vero  a  possibili,"  i.  e.,  the  possibiliii/  of  sin- 
ning was  necessary,  but  the  sinning  itself  merely  possible.  The  peccare  posse,  says 
Augustine,  in  the  same  connection,  is  natura,  the  peccare  is  culpa. 

*  Non  posse  peccare,  or  impossibilitas  peccandi. 


820  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

the  holy  angels  who  have  acceptably  passed  their  probation, 
and  to  the  redeemed  saints  in  heaven. 

In  like  manner  he  distinguishes  between  absolute  and  rela- 
tive immortality.'  The  former  is  the  impossibility  of  dying, 
founded  upon  the  impossibility  of  sinning ;  an  attribute  of  God 
and  of  the  saints  after  the  resurrection.  The  latter  is  the  bare 
pre-conformation  for  immortality,  and  implies  the  opposite 
possibility  of  death.  This  was  the  immortality  of  Adam  before 
the  fall,  and  if  he  had  persevered,  it  would  have  passed  into 
the  impossibility  of  dying ;  but  it  was  lost  by  sin.* 

Freedom,  also,  Augustine  holds  to  be  an  original  endowment 
of  man ;  but  he  distinguishes  different  kinds  of  it,  and  different 
degrees  of  its  development,  which  we  must  observe,  or  we 
should  charge  him  with  self-contradiction.^ 

By  freedom  Augustine  understands,  in  the  first  place,  sim- 
ply sj)ontaneity  or  self -activity^  as  opposed  to  action  under 
external  constraint  or  from  animal  instinct.  Both  sin  and 
holiness  are  vohmtary,  that  is,  acts  of  the  will,  not  motions  of 
natural  necessity."  This  freedom  belongs  at  all  times  and 
essentially  to  the  human  will,  even  in  the  sinful  state  (in  which 

'  Between  the  non  posse  mori  and  the  posse  non  mori,  or  between  the  immor- 
talitas  major  and  the  immortalitas  minor. 

°  Comp.  Opus  imperf.  1.  vi.  cap.  30  (torn.  x.  fol.  1360):  "Ilia  vero  unmortalitaa 
in  qua  sancti  angeli  vivunt,  et  in  qua  nos  quoque  victuri  sumus,  procul  dubio  major 
est.  Xon  enim  talis,  in  qua  homo  habeat  quidem  in  potestate  non  mori,  sicut  non 
peccare,  sed  etiam  possit  et  mori,  quia  potest  peccare :  sed  talis  est  ilia  immortalitas, 
in  qua  omnis  qui  ibi  est,  vel  erit,  mori  non  poterit,  quia  nee  peccare  jam  poterit." 
De  corrept.  et  grat.  §  33  (x.  f.  'ZdS) :  "  Prima  libertas  voluntatis  erat,  posse  non 
peccare,  novissima  erit  multo  major,  non  posse  peccare :  prima  immortalitas  erat, 
posse  non  mori,  novissima  erit  multo  major,  non  posse  mori :  prima  erat  perseve- 
rantise  potestas,  bonum  posse  non  deserere ;  novissima  erit  felicitas  perseverantiae, 
bonum  non  posse  deserere." 

'  The  distinctions  in  the  Augustinian  idea  of  freedom  have  been  overlooked  by 
Wiggers  and  most  of  the  old  historians,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  brought  out  with 
more  or  less  clearness  by  Neander  (in  the  Kirchengeschichte  and  in  the  Dogmen- 
geschichte),  by  Ritter  (Geseh.  der  christl.  Philosophic,  ii.  p.  341  ff.),  Jul.  Miiller  (Die 
christl.  Lehre  von  der  Siinde,  ii.  45  ff.),  Joh.  Huber  (Philosophic  der  Kirchenvater, 
p.  296  ff.).  Baur  bases  his  acute  criticism  of  the  Augustinian  system  in  part  upon 
the  false  assumption  that  Augustine's  view  of  the  hberum  arbitrium  was  precisely 
the  same  as  that  of  Pelagius.     See  below. 

*  Pietract.  i.  c.  9,  §  4 :  "  Voluntas  est  qua  et  peccatur,  ct  recte  vivitur." 


§   152.      THE  AUGU8TINTAN   SYSTEM.  821 

tlie  will  is,  strictly  speaking,  self-willed)]  it  is  the  necessary- 
condition  of  guilt  and  punishment,  of  merit  and  reward.  In 
this  view  no  thinking  man  can  deny  freedom,  without  destroy- 
ing the  responsibility  and  the  moral  nature  of  man.  An 
involuntary  will  is  as  bald  a  self-contradiction  as  an  imiutel- 
ligent  intelligence.' 

A  second  form  of  freedom  is  the  liberum  arbitrium,  or 
freedom  of  choice.  Here  Augustine  goes  half-way  with  Pela- 
gius ;  especially  in  his  earlier  writings,  in  opposition  to  Mani- 
chseism,  which  denied  all  freedom,  and  made  evil  a  natural 
necessity  and  an  original  substance.  Like  Pelagius  he  ascribes 
freedom  of  choice  to  the  first  man  before  the  fall.  God  created 
man  with  the  double  capacity  of  sinning  or  not  sinning,  for- 
bidding the  former  and  commanding  the  latter.     But  Augus- 

'  Here  belong  especially  the  first  chapters  of  the  treatises,  De  gratia  et  libcro 
arbitrio  (torn.  x.  fol.  V17-721),  of  the  Opus  imperf.  contra  Julianum,  and  Contra  duas 
epistolas  Pelagianorum.  In  this  sense  even  the  strictest  adherents  of  the  Augustin- 
ian  and  CalvLnistic  system  have  always  more  or  less  explicitly  conceded  tuman 
freedom.  Thus  Cunningham,  a  CalvLoist  of  the 'Free  Church  of  Scotland,  in  his 
presentation  of  the  Pelagian  controversy  (Hist.  Theol.  i.  p.  325) :  "  Augustine  certainly 
did  not  deny  man's  free  will  altogether,  and  in  every  sense  of  the  word ;  and  the 
most  zealous  defenders  of  the  doctrines  of  gra^e  and  of  Calvinistic  prmciples  have 
admitted  that  there  is  a  free  will  or  free  agency,  in  some  sense,  which  man  has,  and 
which  is  necessary  to  his  being  responsible  for  his  transgressions  of  God's  law.  It 
is  laid  down  in  our  own  [the  Westminster]  Confession,  that '  God  hath  endued  the 
will  of  man  with  that  natural  liberty,  that  it  is  neither  forced,  nor  by  any  absolute 
necessity  of  nature  determined  to  good  or  evil.' "  Dr.  Shedd,  an  American  Presby- 
terian of  the  Old  School,  in  his  History  of  Christian  Doctrine,  ii.  p.  66,  where  he,  in 
Augustine's  view,  expresses  his  own,  says :  "  The  guilt  of  sin  consists  in  its  unforced 
wilfulness ;  and  this  guilt  is  not  in  the  least  diminished  by  the  fact  that  the  will 
cannot  overcome  its  own  wilfulness.  For  this  wicked  wilfulness  was  not  created  in 
the  will,  but  is  the  product  of  the  will's  act  of  apostasy.  The  present  impotence  to 
holiness  is  not  an  original  and  primitive  impotence.  By  creation  Adam  had  plenary 
power,  not  indeed  to  originate  holiness,  for  no  creature  has  this,  but  io  preserve  and 
perpetuate  it.  The  present  destitution  of  holiness,  and  impossibility  of  originating 
it,  iij  due  therefore  to  the  creature's  apostatizing  agency,  and  is'  a  part  of  his  con- 
demnation." Also,  p.  80 :  "  There  is  no  author  in  the  whole  theological  catalogue, 
who  is  more  careful  and  earnest  than  Augustine,  to  assert  that  sin  is  se(/"-activity, 
and  that  its  source  is  in  the  voluntary  nature  of  man.  Sin,  according  to  him,  is  not 
a  substance,  but  an  agency ;  it  ia  not  the  essence  of  any  faculty  in  man,  but  only 
the  action  of  a  faculty."  Neither  Dr.  Cunningham  nor  Dr.  Shedd,  however,  takes 
any  account  of  the  different  forms  and  degrees  of  freedom  in  the  Augustinian 
system. 


822  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

tine  differs  from  Pelagius  in  viewing  Adam  not  as  poised  in 
entire  indifference  between  good  and  evil,  obedience  and  disobe- 
dience, but  as  having  a  positive  constitutional  tendency  to  the 
good,  yet  involving,  at  the  same  time,  a  possibility  of  sinning.' 
Besides,  Augustine,  in  the  interest  of  grace  and  of  true  free- 
dom, disparages  the  freedom  of  choice,  and  limits  it  to  the 
beginning,  the  transient  state  of  probation.  This  relative 
indecision  cannot  be  at  all  predicated  of  God  or  the  angels, 
of  the  saints  or  of  sinners.  It  is  an  imperfection  of  the  will, 
which  the  actual  choosing  of  the  good  or  the  evil  more  or  less 
surmounts.  Adam,  with  the  help  of  divine  grace,  without 
which  he  might  will  the  good,  indeed,  but  could  not  persevere 
in  it,  should  have  raised  himself  to  the  true  freedom,  the  moral 
necessity  of  good ;  but  by  choosing  the  evil,  he  fell  into  the 
bondage  of  sin.'^  Augustine,  however,  incidentally  concedes, 
that  the  liberum  arbitrium  still  so  far  exists  even  in  fallen 
man,  that  he  can  choose,  not  indeed  between  sin  and  holiness, 
but  between  individual  actions  within  the  sphere  of  sinfulness 
and  of  justitia  civilis.^  VT^ 

'  This  important  distinction  is  overlooked  by  Baur,  in  his  Kirchengeschichte 
Yom  4-6ten  Jahrhundert,  p.  143.  It  takes  off  the  edge  from  his  sharp  criticism  of 
the  Augustinian  system,  in  which  he  charges  it  with  inconsistency  in  starting  from 
the  same  idea  of  freedom  as  Pelagius  and  yet  opposing  it. 

°  Comp.  respecting  this  conception  of  freedom,  the  treatise,  De  libero  arbitrio 
(in  Opera,  torn.  i.  f.  569  sqq.),  which  was  begun  A.  n.  888,  and  finished  a.  d.  895, 
and  belongs  therefore  to  his  earliest  writings ;  also,  De  correptione  et  gratia  (es- 
pecially cap.  9-11),  and  the  sixth  book  of  the  Opus  imperf.  c.  JuUanum.  Also 
Contra  duas  epistolas  Pelag,  1.  ii.  c.  2  (torn.  x.  f.  432),  where  he  opposes  both  the 
Manichasan  denial  of  the  liberum  arbitrium  and  the  Pelagian  assertion  of  its  contin- 
uance after  the  fall.  "  Manichsei  negant,  homini  bono  ex  libero  arbitrio  fuisse  ini- 
tium  mali;  Pelagian!  dicunt,  etiam  hominem  malum  sufficienter  habere  liberum 
arbitriiun  ad  faciendum  prseceptum  bonum ;  catholica  [fides]  utrosque  redarguit,  et 
illis  dicens :  Fecit  Ueus  hominem  rectum,  et  istis  dicens :  Si  vos  FiUus  liberaverit, 
vere  liberi  eritis.'ly 

^  Contra  ducfs  epist.  Pelag.  ii.  c.  5  (or  §  9,  torn.  s.  f.  436):  "Peccato  Adte  arbi- 
trium liberum  de  homiuum  natura  periisse  non  dicimus,  sed  ad  peccandum  valere  in 
horainibus  subditis  diabolo,  ad  bene  autem  picque  vivendum  non  valere,  nisi  ipsa 
voluntas  hominis  Dei  gratia  fuerit  liberata,  et  ad  omne  bonum  actionis,  semionis, 
cogitationis  adjuta."  Also,  De  gratia  et  libero  arbitrio,  c.  15  (x.  f.  734):  "Semper 
est  autem  in  nobis  voluntas  libera,  sed  non  semper  est  bona.  Aut  enim  a  justitia 
libera  est,  quando  servit  peccato,  et  tunc  est  mala ;  aut  a  peccato  libera  est,  quando 
servit  justitise,  et  tunc  est  bona.     Gratia  vero  Dei  semper  est  bona."    Dr.  Baur,  it 


M 


§  152.      THE   AUGUSTINIAN    SYSTEM.  823 

Finally,  Augustine  speaks  most  frequently  and  most  fondly 
of  the  highest  freedom,  the  free  self-decision  or  self-detennina- 
tion  of  the  will  towards  the  good  and  holy,  the  blessed  free- 
dom of  the  children  of  God ;  which  still  includes,  it  is  true,  in 
this  earthly  life,  the  possibility  of  sinning,  but  becomes  in 
heaven  the  image  of  the  divine  freedom,  n,felix  necessitas  ho7ii, 
and  cannot,  because  it  will  not,  sin.*  It  is  the  exact  opposite 
of  the  dura  necessitas  mali  in  the  state  of  sin.  It  is  not  a 
faculty  possessed  in  common  by  all  rational  minds,  but  the 
highest  stage  of  moral  development,  confined  to  true  Christians. 
This  freedom  Augustine  finds  expressed  in  that  word  of  our 
Lord :  "If  the  Son  shall  make  you  free,  ye  shall  be  free  in- 
deed." It  does  not  dispense  with  grace,  but  is  generated  by 
it ;  the  more  grace,  the  more  freedom.  The  will  is  free  in 
proportion  as  it  is  healthy,  and  healthy  in  proportion  as  it 
moves  in  the  element  of  its  true  life,  in  God,  and  obeys  TTim 
of  its  own  spontaneous  impulse.  To  serve  God  is  the  true 
freedom.^  • 

is  true  (Die  christl.  Kirche  vom  Anfang  de3  4ten  bis  Ende  de3  6ten  Jahrhunderts, 
p.  140),  is  not  wliolly  ■wrong  when  he,  with  reference  to  this  passage,  charges 
Augustine  with  an  equrvocal  play  upon  words,  in  retaining  the  term  freedom,  but 
changing  its  sense  into  its  direct  opposite.  "  Meaningless  as  it  is,"  says  Baur,  "  to 
talii  in  this  equivocal  sense  of  freedom,  we  however  see  even  from  this  what  interest 
the  idea  of  freedom  still  had  for  him,  even  after  he  had  sacrificed  it  to  the  determi- 
nism of  his  system."  The  Lutheran  theologians  likewise  restricted  the  hberum 
arbitrium  of  fallen  man  to  the  justitia  civilis,  in  distinction  from  the  justitia  Dei,  or 
spiritualis.  Comp.  Melanchthon,  in  the  Confessio  Augustana,  art.  xviii.  The  For- 
mula Concordise  goes  even  beyond  Augustine,  and  compares  the  natural  man  in 
spirituahbus  et  divinis  rebus  with  a  "  statua  saUs,"  "  truncus,"  and  "  lapis,"  nay,  makes 
him  out  yet  worse  off",  inasmuch  as  he  is  not  merely  passive,  but  "  voluntati  divinae 
rebeUis  est  et  inimicus"  (pp.  661  and  662). 

'  De  corrept.  et  gratia,  §  32  (x.  '768) :  "  Quid  erit  Uberius  hbero  arbitrio,  quando 
non  poterit  servire  peccato  ?  ...  §  33 :  Prima  libertas  voluntatis  erat,  posse  nou 
peccare,  novissima  erit  multo  major,  non  posse  peccare." 

^  "  Deo  servire  vera  libertas  est ; "  a  profound  and  noble  saying.  This  higher 
conception  of  freedom  Augustine  had  substantially  expressed  long  before  the  Pela- 
gian controversy,  e.  g.,  in  the  Confessions.  Comp.  also  De  civit.  Dei,  1.  xiv.  c.  11 : 
"  Arbitrium  igitur  voluntatis  tunc  est  vere  liberum,  quum  vitiis  peccatisque  non 
servit.  Tale  datum  est  a  Deo :  quod  amissum  proprio  vitio,  nisi  a  quo  dari  potuit, 
reddi  non  potest.  Unde  Veritas  dicit :  Si  vos  filius  Uberaverit,  tunc  vere  liberi  eritis. 
Id  ipsum  est  autem,  ac  si  diceret :  Si  vos  Fihus  salvos  fecerit,  tunc  vere  salvi  eritis. 
Inde  quipp^e  liberatuj,  unde  salyatur." 


824:  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

§  153.     The  Augustinian  System :  The  Fall  and  its 
Consequences. 

To  TinderstaQd  Augustine's  doctrine  of  the  fall  of  man,  we 
must  remember,  first  of  all,  that  he  starts  with  the  idea  of  the 
organic  unity  9f  the  human  race,  and  with  the  profound  par- 
allel of  Paul  between  the  first  and  the  second  Adam ; '  that  he 
views  the  first  man  not  merely  as  an  individual,  but  at  the  same 
time  as  the  progenitor  and  representative  of  the  whole  race, 
standing  to  natural  mankind  in  the  same  relation  as  that  of 
Christ  to  redeemed  and  regenerate  mankind.  The  history  of 
the  fall,  recorded  in  a  manner  at  once  profound  and  childlike 
in  the  third  chapter  of  Genesis,  has,  therefore,  universal  signifi- 
cance. In  Adam  human  nature  fell,  and  therefore  all,  who 
have  inherited  that  nature  from  him,  who  were  in  him  as  the 
fruit  in  the  germ,  and  who  have  grown  up,  as  it  were,  one 
person  with  him.f'^ 

Biit  Augustine  did  not  stop  with  the  ^fory  just  idea  of  an 
organicXconnection  of  the  human  race,, and V)f  the  sin  of  Adcwn 
with  original  sin ;   he  also  supposed  a  sort  of  pre-existence 
_  of  all  theN|30sterity  of  Adam  in  himself,  so  tnat  they  actually 

i^  and    personVly   sinned    in    him,   though  not,   indeed,   with 

N.       individual  coJisciousness.     Since  we  were,  at  tlie  time  of  the 
V  j      fall,  "in  lumbis.  Adami,"  the  sin  of  Adam  is  r jure  semina- 

^  /  tionis  et  germinationis,"  our  sin  and  guilt,  and  p'i^ysical  death 
/  is  a  penalty  even  ^Jpon  infant  children,  as  it  waNs  a  penalty 
upon  Adam.  The  posterity  of  Adam  therefore  suffer  punish- 
ment not  for  the  sin  of  another,  but  for  the  sin  wli^ch  they 
themsely^  committed  iii,  Adam.  This  view,  as  we  shnll  see 
farther  on,  Augustine  foub4s  upon  a  false  interpretati(OT*  of 
K9Hf:  V.  12. 

I.  The  Fall.  The  original  state  of  man  included  the 
possibility  of  sinning,  and  this  was  the  imperfection  of  that 

'  Rom.  V.  12  ff. ;  1  Cor.  xv.  22. 

*  De  civit.  Dei,  1.  xiii.  c.  14:  "Omnes  enim  fuimua  in  illo  uno,  quando  omnes 
fuimus  ille  unus,  qui  per  feminara  lapsus  est  in  peccatum,  quas  de  illo  facta  est  ante 
peccatum!*''^  Ciomparo  otbep^aogngigB  boloit%»  J/<T^0La*vl  CAti^  Otcr^c^ 


£  ?  /t  ^ 

/b  c/^^^^r    ^^    ^^   -Z^^^  ^^  ^    /,^.4   .Jl^     /«i   ^*UtZA^Ci- 


i^'lAtt^. 


^ir^t^^i,  'i   fi^  J^-   ii 


24 


§  153.      THE   AUGTJSTINIAN   SYSTEM   COlSTmUED.  825 

state.  This  possibility  became  reality.  Why  it  should  have 
been  realized,  is  incomprehensible ;  since  evil  never  has,  like 
good,  a  sufficient  reason.  It  is  irrationality  itself.  Augustine 
fixes  an  immense  gulf  between  the  primitive  state  and  the 
state  of  sin.  But  when  thought  has  accomplished  this  adven- 
turous leap,  it  finds  his  system  coherent  throughout. 

Adam  did  not  fall  without  temptation  '  from  another. 
That  angel,  who,  in  his  pride,  had  turned  away  from  God  to 
himself,  tempted  man,  who,  standing  yet  in  his  integrity,  pro- 
voked his  envy.  He  first  approached  the  woman,  the  weaker 
and  the  more  credulous.  The  essence  of  the  sin  of  Adam  con- 
sisted not  in  the  eating  of  the  fruit ;  for  this  was  in  itself  ^ 
neither  wrong  nor  harmful ;  but  in  disobedience  to  the  com-  ^  ■'<^'^' 
mand  of  God.  "  Obedience  was  enjoined  by  that  command- 
ment, as  the  virtue  which,  in  the  rational  creature,  is,  as  it 
were,  the  mother  and  guardian  of  all  virtues."  The  principle, 
the  root  of  sin,  was  pride,  self-seeking,  the  craving  of  the  will 
to  forsake  its  author,  and  become  its  own.  This  pride  preceded 
the  outward  act.  Our  first  parents  were  sinful  in  heart,  before 
they  had  yet  fallen  into  open  disobedience.  "  For  man  never 
yet  proceeded  to  an  evil  work,  unless  incited  to  it  by  an  evil 
will."  This  pride  even  preceded  the  temptation  of  the  serpent. 
"  If  man  had  not  previously  begun  to  take  pleasure  in  himself, 
the  serpent  could  have  had  no  hold  upon  him." 

The  fall  of  Adam  appears  the  greater,  and  the  more  worthy 
of  punishment,  if  we  consider,  first,  the  height  he  occupied, 
the  divine  image  in  which  he  was  created ;  then,  the  simplicity 
of  the  commandment,  and  ease  of  obeying  it,  in  the  abundance 
of  all  manner  of  fruits  in  paradise ;  and  finally,  the  sanction 
of  the  most  terrible  punishment  from  his  Creator  and  greatest 
Benefactor. 

Thus  Augustine  goes  behind  the  appearance  to  the  sub- 
stance ;  below  the  surface  to  the  deeper  truth.  He  does  not 
stop  with  the  outwa,rd  act,  but  looks  chiefly  at  the  disposition 
which  lies  at  its  root. 

II.  The  Consequences  of  the  primal  sin,  both  for  Adam  and 
for  his  posterity,  are,  in  Augustine's  view,  comprehensive  and 


826  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

terrible  in  proportion  to  tlie  lieinoiisness  of  tlie  sin  itself.  And 
all  these  consequences  are  at  the  same  time  punishments  from 
the  righteous  God,  who  has,  by  one  and  the  same  law,  joined 
reward  with  obedience  and  penalty  with  sin.  They  are  all 
comprehended  under  death^  in  its  widest  sense ;  as  Paul  says : 
"  The  wages  of  sin  is  death ; "  and  in  Gen.  ii.  17  we  are  to 
understand  by  the  threatened  death,  all  evil  both  to  body  and 
to  soul. 

Augustine  particularizes  the  consequences  of  sin  under 
seven  heads ;  the  first  four  being  negative,  the  others  positive : 

1.  Loss  of  the  freedom  of  choice^  which  consisted  in  a 
positive  inclination  and  love  to  the  good,  with  the  implied 
possibility  of  sin.  In  place  of  this  freedom  has  come  the  hard 
necessity  of  sinning,  bondage  to  evil.  "  The  will,  which,  aided 
by  grace,  would  have  become  a  source  of  good,  became  to 
Adam,  in  his  apostasy  from  God,  a  source  of  evil." 

2.  Obstruction  of  hiowledge.  Man  was  originally  able  to 
learn  everytliing  easily,  without  labor,  and  to  understand 
everything  aright.  But  now  the  mind  is  beclouded,  and 
knowledge  can  be  acquired  and  imparted  only  in  the  sweat  of 
the  face. 

3.  Loss  of  the  grace  of  God,  which  enabled  man  to  per- 
form the  good  which  his  freedom  willed,  and  to  persevere 
therein.  By  not  willing,  man  forfeited  his  ability,  and  now, 
though  he  would  do  good,  he  cannot. 

4.  Loss  of  paradise.  The  earth  now  lies  under  the  curse 
of  God :  it  brings  forth  thorns  and  thistles,  and  in  the  sweat 
of  his  face  man  must  eat  his  bread. 

5.  Cmicupiscence^  i.  e.,  not  sensuousness  in  itself,  but  the 
preponderance  of  the  sensuous,  the  lusting  of  the  flesh  against 
the  spirit.  Thus  God  punishes  sin  with  sin — a  proposition 
which  Julian  considered  blasphemy.  Originally  the  body  was 
as  joyfully  obedient  to  the  spirit,  as  man  to  God.  There  was 
but  one  will  in  exercise.  4/By  the  fall  this  beautiful  harmony 
has  been  broken,  and  that  antagonism  has  arisen  which  Paul 

'  Of  course  not  in  indifferent  things  of  ordinary  life,  in  which  the  greatest  sinner 
is  free  to  choose,  but  in  reference  to  the  great  religious  decision  for  or  against  God 
and  divine  things. 


§   153.      THE   AUGTJSTINIAN   SYSTEM   CONTINUED.  827 

describes  in  the  seventh  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  tlie  Romans. 
(Augustine  referred  this  passage  to  the  regenerate  state.) 
The  rebellion  of  the  spirit  against  God  involved,  as  its  natural 
punishment,  the  rebellion  of  the  flesh  against  the  spirit. 
Concupiscentia^  therefore,  is  substantially  the  same  as  what 
Paul  calls  in  the  bad  sense  "flesh."  It  is  not  the  sensual  con- 
stitution in  itself,  but  its  predominance  over  the  higher,  rational 
nature  of  man.'  It  is  true,  however,  that  Augustine,  in  his 
longing  after  an  unimpeded  life  in  the  spirit,  was  inclined  to 
treat  even  lawful  appetites,  such  as  hunger  and  thirst,  so  far 
as  they  assume  the  form  of  craving  desire,  as  at  least  remotely 
connected  with  the  fall.''  Julian  attributed  the  strength  of 
animal  desire  to  the  animal  element  in  the  original  nature  of 
man.  Augustine  answered,  that  the  superiority  of  man  to  the 
brute  consists  in  the  complete  dominion  of  reason  over  the 
sensual  nature,  and  that  therefore  his  approach  to  the  brute  in 
tliis  respect  is  a  punishment  from  God.  Concupiscence  then 
is  no  more  a  merely  coi-poreal  thing  than  the  biblical  crapl^^ 
but  has  its  seat  in  the  soul,  without  which  no  lust  arises.  We 
must,  therefore,  suppose  a  conflict  in  the  soul  itself,  a  lower, 
earthly,  self-seeking  instinct,  and  a  higher,  god-like  impulse. 

This  is  the  generic  sense  of  concupiscentia :  the  struggle  of 
the  collective  sensual  and  psychical  desires  against  the  god-like 
spirit.  But  Augustine  frequently  employs  the  word,  as  other 
corresponding  terms  are  used,  in  the  naiTower  sense  of  unlaw- 
ful sexual  desire.  This  appeared  immediately  after  the  fall,  in 
the  shame  of  our  first  parents,  which  was  not  for  their  naked- 
ness itself,  since  this  was  nothing  new  to  them,  but  for  the 

^  Not  the  "  sentiendi  vivacitas,"  but  the  "  libido  sentiendi,  quae  nos  ad  sentien- 
dum,  sive  consentientes  mente,  sive  repugnantes,  appetitu  carnalis  voluptatis  impel- 
lit."  C.  Julianum,  1.  iv.  c.  14  (§  65,  torn.  x.  f.  615).  He  illustrates  the  difference  by 
a  reference  to  Matt.  v.  28.  "  Non  ait  Dominus :  qui  viderit  mulierem,  sed :  qui 
viderit  ad  concupiscendum,  jam,  mcechatiis  est  earn  in  corde  sico,  .  .  .  lilud  [videre] 
Deus  condidit,  instruendo  corpus  humanum ;  iUud  [videre  ad  concupiscendum]  dia- 
bolus  senainavit,  persuadendo  peccatum." 

'^  "  Quis  autem  mente  sobrius  non  maUet,  si  fieri  posset,  sine  ulla  mordaci  volup- 
tate  camali  vel  arida  sumere  alimenta,  vel  humida,  sicut  sumimus  haec  aeria,  quae 
de  circumfusis  auris  respirando  et  spirando  sorbemus  et  fundimus  ?  "  Contra  JuL 
iv.  c.  14,  §  68,  f.  616. 


828  THIED  PEEIOD.   A.D.    311-590. 

lusting  of  tlie  body ;  for  something,  therefore,  in  and  of  itself 
good  (the  body's  own  enjoyment,  as  it  were),  but  now  unlaw- 
fully rising,  through  the  discord  between  body  and  soul.  But 
would  there  then  have  been  propagation  without  the  fall? 
Unquestionably ;  but  it  would  have  left  the  dominion  of  reason 
over  the  sensual  desire  undisturbed.  Propagation  would  have 
been  the  act  of  a  pure  will  and  chaste  love,  and  would  have 
had  no  more  shame  about  it  than  the  scattering  of  seed  upon 
the  maternal  bosom  of  the  earth.  But  now  lust  rules  the 
spirit ;  and  Augustine  in  his  earlier  years  had  had  bitter  expe- 
rience of  its  tyranny.  To  this  element  of  sin  in  the  act  of  pro- 
creation he  ascribes  the  pains  of  child-birth,  which  in  fact 
appear  in  Genesis  as  a  consequence  of  the  fall,  and  as  a  curse 
from  God.  Had  man  remained  pure,  "  the  ripe  fruit  would 
have  descended  from  the  maternal  womb  without  labor  or  pain 
of  the  woman,  as  the  fruit  descends  from  the  tree." ' 

6.  Physical  death,  with  its  retinue  of  diseases  and  bodily 
pains.  Adam  was  indeed  created  mortal,  that  is,  capable  of 
death,  but  not  subject  to  death.  By  a  natural  development  the 
possibility  of  dying  would  have  been  overcome  by  the  power 
of  immortality ;  the  body  would  have  been  gradually  spirit- 
ualized and  clothed  with  glory,  without  a  violent  transition  or 
even  tlip  weakness  of  old  age.  But  now  man  is  fallen  under 
the  bitter  necessity  of  death.  Because  the  spirit  forsook  God 
willingly,  it  must  now  forsake  the  body  unwillingly.  With 
profound  discernment  Augustine  shows  that  not  only  the 
actual  severance  of  soul  and  body,  but  the  whole  life  of  sinful 
man  is  a  continual  dying.  Even  with  the  pains  of  birth  and 
the  first  cry  of  the  child  does  death  begin.  The  threatening 
of  the  Lord,  therefore ;  "  In  the  day  ye  eat  thereof,  ye  shall 
die,"  began  at  once  to  be  fulfilled.  For  though  our  first 
parents  lived  many  years  afterwards,  they  immediately  began 
to  grow  old  and  to  die.  Life  is  an  unceasing  march  towards 
death,  and  "  to  no  one  is  it  granted,  even  for  a  little,  to  stand 
still,  or  to  go  more  slowly,  but  all  are  constrained  to  go  with 
equal  pace,  and  no  one  is  impelled  differently  from  others. 
For  he  whose  life  has  been  shorter,  saw  therefore  no  shorter 

'  De  civitatc  Dei,  xiv.  26. 


I 


^.l^ik^    dU    ^'T-f   O-l^^ 


:</ 


«'t<^fVYVK« 


a   ;^if^e^^/^^  Y  ^^"^^i^'  ^"j^y    Sri^'' -"-'V-. 

,^*vJw^  j^c.-^.-^  T-^^Af^  ^jM^^*^^^-^  ^ 


§   154.      THE   ATJGIISTINIAN   SYSTEM   CONTINUED.  829 

day  than  he  whose  life  was  longer.  And  he  who  uses  more 
time  to  reach  death,  docs  not  therefore  go  slower,  but  only 
makes  a  longer  journey." 

7.  The  most  important  consequence  of  the  fall  of  Adam  is 
original  sin  and  hereditary  guilt  in  his  whole  posterity ;  and 
as  this  was  also  one  of  the  chief  points  of  controversy,  it  must 
be  exhibited  at  length. 


§  154.     The  Aiigustinian  System :    Original  Sin,  and  the 
Origin  of  the  Human  Soul. 

Original  sin,'  according  to  Augustine,  is  the  native  bent  of 
the  soul  towards  evil,  with  which  all  the  posterity  of  Adam — 
excepting  Christ,  who  was  conceived  by  the  Holy  Ghost  and 
born  of  a  pure  Yirgin — come  into  the  world,  and  out  of  which 
all  actual  sins  of  necessity  proceed.  It  appears  principally  in 
concupiscence,  or  the  war  of  the  flesh  against  the  spirit.  Sin 
is  not  merely  an  individual  act,  but  also  a  condition,  a  status 
and  habitus,  which  continues,  by  procreation,  from  generation 
to  generation.  Original  sin  results  necessarily,  as  has  been 
already  remarked,  from  the  generic  and  representative  charac- 
ter of  Adam,  in  whom  human  nature  itself,  and  so,  potentially, 
all  who  should  inherit  that  nature,  fell.^  The  corruption  of 
the  root  communicates  itself  to  the  trunk  and  the  branchesT]  ^"^ 
But  where  sin  is,  there  is  always  guilt  and  ill-desert  in  the 
eyes  of  a  righteous  God.  The  whole  race,  through  the  fall  of 
its  progenitor,  has  become  a  massa  perditionis.  This,  of  course, 
still  admits  different  degrees  both  of  sinfulness  and  of  guilt. 

Original  sin  and  guilt  are  propagated  by  natural  genera- 

Peccatum  originale,  vitium  hereditarium.  •:    ■^**"  '^ 

^  De  peccatonim  mentis  et  remissione,  1.  iii.  c.  7  (§  14,  torn.  x.  f.  78) :    "  In  "^n 

Adam  omnes  tunc  peccaverunt,  quando  in  ejus  natura  ilia  insita  vi,  qua  eos  gignere  1     'T,vt«^«-*- 

poterat,  adhuc  omnes  ille  unus  fuerunt."     De  corrept.  et  gratia,  §  28  (x.  f.  V65) :  y         j.      i,  .^ 

"  Quia  vero  [Adam]  per  liberum  arbitrium  Deum  deseruit,  justum  judicium  Dei  \  ^  Lw\/>o 

expertus  est,  ut  cum  tota  sua  stirpe,  qure  in  illo  adhuc  posita  tota  cum  illo  pecca-  j  ^  ,   o? ij^ 

rerat,  damnaretur."    This  wam-aagily  fell  k^with  Augustine's  PlatoiBCO-Aristotelian  i  '.  /^Mf^_^ 

TUglimtr'-yhirh  Tpgnrrfni  thti  {T-nnBalifffm-rptinTin  itit  Thi'-frrinnfiV  typ'''''  "^  '"'^^'''^^'•"'^  «    / 

thinffl.--4tn»  ttn>  mwrrtfcaiLJAjii  jjppppr  ;n-ht»-<3fari.qt4«wv.«Awflr.ion^»«flfl  anel«profo«nd  v ->*m, 
■of^^'all-pervftding  pewei^jrf*ia«j,-«.^Wjfc,»,j,,/«i»«. 


830  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

tion.  The  generic  character  planted  in  Adam  unfolds  itself 
in  a  succession  of  individuals,  who  organically  grow  one  out 
of  another.  As  sin,  however,  is  not  merelj  a  thing  of  the 
body,  but  primarily  and  essentially  of  the  spirit,  the  question 
arises,  on  which  of  the  current  theories  as  to  the  origin  and 
jproj)agatio7i  of  souls  Augustine  based  his  view. 

This  metaphysical  problem  enters  theology  in  connection 
with  tlie  doctrine  of  original  sin ;  this,  therefore,  is  the  place 
to  say  what  is  needful  upon  it.'  The  Gnostic  and  pantheistic 
emanation-i}xQOvj  had  long  since  been  universally  rejected  as 
heretical.  But  three  other  views  had  found  advocates  in  the 
^       church  •/  ; 

1.  The  Tradueian  *  or  Generation-theorj  teaches  that  the 

_^       soul  originates  with  the  body  from  the  act  of  procreation,  and 

I'Jta^dM**'^  therefore  through  human  agency??  It  is  countenanced  by  sev- 
i^^^^^'^'^^eral  passages  of  Scrii)ture,  such  as  Gen.  v.  3 ;  Ps.  li.  6 ;  Rom. 
^^kc^^f^  V.  12 ;  1  Cor.  xv.  22 ;  Eph.  ii.  3 ;  it  is  decidedly  suitable  to  the 
/3^  /«i^  '^,  doctrine  of  original  sin ;  and  hence,  since  Tertullian,  it  has 
^^>&*^^  been  adopted  by  most  Western  theologians  in  support  and 
^,^1^  f/^t^^  explanation  of  that  doctrine.v 

\t^^r^^'  ^-  "^^^  Creatio)i-theorj  ascribes  each  individual  soul  to  a 

%^T^ffC*^^<f^,  direct  creative  act  of  God,  and  supposes  it  to  be  united  with 

/j^oJ,  t^  ^  /  "  ^^  premiere  difficulte  est,"  says  Leibnitz  in  the  Theodicee,  Partie  i.  86, 

/l,.^M£/fftJ^ivit^ <■'■  comment  I'ame  a  pu  etre  infectee  du  peche  originel,  qui  est  la  racine  des  pech6s 

^(Jr^ ta^e^J*^       actuels,  sans  qu'il  y  ait  eu  de  I'injustice  en  Dieu  h,  I'y  exposer."      ^^_-- 

r^'^^^^^jj^i^  '■ )  -^  From  tradux,  propagator.  The  author  of  this  theory  is  Tertullian,  De  anima, 
iJl^'^fff^^  ^'  ^'^  (Opera,  ed.  Fr.  Oehler,  torn.  ii.  p.  599  sqq.) :  "Immo  simul  ambas  [animam 
yj  Atw-  fC'^*^  ■  et  corpus]  et  concipi  et  confici  et  perfici  dicimus,  sicut  et  promi,  nee  ullum  iuterve- 
nire  momentum  in  conceptu  quo  locus  ordinetur,  .  .  .  Igitur  ex  uno  homine  tota 
hsec  animarum  redundantia."  Cap.  86  (p.  617):  "Anima  in  utero  seminata  pariter 
cum  came  pariter  cum  ipsa  sortitur."  Comp.  c.  19  (anima  velut  surculus  quidam 
ex  matrice  Adam  in  propaginem  deducta) ;  De  resurr.  camis,  c.  45 ;  Adv.  Valentin. 
c.  25  (tradux  animse).  With  Tertullian  this  theory  was  connected  with  a  material- 
izing view  of  the  soul. 
4/  *  Jerome  says  of  the  maxima  pars  occidentalium,  that  they  teach :  "  Ut  quomodo 
corpus  ex  corpore,  sic  anima  nascatur  ex  anima,  et  simili  cum  brutis  animalibus 
conditione  subsistat."  Ep.  78  ad  Marcell.  Leo  the  Great  declared  it  even  to  be 
cathoUca  fides,  that  every  man  "  in  corporis  et  animse  substantiam  formari  intra 
materna  viscera."  Ep.  15  ad  Turrib.  Similarly  among  the  Oriental  fathers,  Theo- 
doret.  Fab.  hjer.  v.  9 :  ^  iicKX-qcria  toTj  i&eiois  Treido,ueVrj  \6yois, — Xtytt  tV  'f'^xV 
crvvdiJiJi.iovpye'tadat  rep  adixaTi. 


^(-JLu^a^    ^^^A'^^'^^^jfe— ,/<i^»'*--^^^^'   ^'*^-^^-^   ^ 


f^/'l-. 


'J 


oAC,    /^^*^^'*>i^/u^itxjL-  ^'i-o^    cr^Lt.    ^**^.    z-****-^  e-^t^  <r^?u^. 
f^^£4^.  aJG.  oUjJt:  {^a^  iaJ!sJ^    0/-t^Aj^  »v^^v/</,   •^'-  -/ 

^  ''•'.oitiiyitji ' 


^--^ 


^  A- 


§    154.      THE   AUGUSTINTAN   SYSTEM   CONTINTJED.  831 

the  body  either  at  the  moment  of  its  generation,  or  afterwards. 
This  view  is  held  by  several  Eastern  theologians  and  by 
Jerome,  who  appeals  to  the  unceasing  creative  activity  of  God 
(John  V.  17).  It  required  the  assumption  that  the  soul,  which 
must  proceed  pure  from  the  hand  of  the  Creator,  becomes  sin- 
ful by  its  connection  with  the  naturally  generated  hody.  a^i'U.  4*10-/^^ 
Pelagius  and  his  followers  were  creationists.*  '^'*f  ""^^  *!  . 


3,  The  theory  of  Pre-exisUnce,  which  was  originated  by 
Plato  and  more  fully  developed  by  Origen,  supposes  that  the 
soul,  even  before  the  origin  o^the  body,  existed  and  sinned  in 
another  world,  and  has  been  banished  in  the  body  as  in  a 
prison,^  to  expiate  that  personal  Adamic  guilt,  and  by  an  ascet- 
ic process  to  be  restored  to  its  original  stateTl  This  is  one  of  1 
the  Origenistic  heresies,  which  were  condemned  under  Justin- 
ian. Even  Gregory  of  jS'yssa,  although,  like  Xemesius  and 
Cyi'il  of  Alexandria,  he  supposed  the  soul  to  be  created  before 
the  body,  compares  Origen's  theory  to  the  heathen  myths  and 
fables.  Origen  himself  allowed  that  the  Bible  does  not  direct- 
ly teach  the  pre-existence  of  the  soul,  but  maintained  that  sev- 
eral passages,  such  as  the  strife  between  Esau  and  Jacob  in 
the  womb,  and  the  leaping  of  John  the  Baptist  in  the  womb 
of  Elizabeth  at  the  salutation  of  Mary,  imply  it.  The  only 
truth  in  this  theory  is  that  every  human  soul  has  from  eternity 
existed  in  the  thought  and  purpose  of  God.*' 

Augustine  emphatically  rejects  the  doctrine  of  pre-exist- 
S^  ence,*  without  considering  that  his  own  theory  of  a  generic 

*  Jerome  says,  appealing  to  John  v.  17 ;  Zech.  xii.  1 ;  Ps.  xxxiii.  15  :  "  Quotidie 
Deus  fabricatur  animas,  cujus  veUe  fecisse  est,  et  conditor  esse  non  cessat."  Pela- 
giu3,  in  his  Confession  of  Faith,  declares  for  the  view  that  souls  are  made  and  given 
by  God  Himself. 

"  The  cuixa  interpreted  as  aij/ta  (sepulchre).  Origen  appeals  to  the  groaning  of 
the  creation,  Rom.  viii.  19?y  ^f 

_3y  '     «yT  ntaly^e  theory  of  pre-existence  has  .^found  ]&  Amuiee  an  advocate  in  Dr. 


^^3^^-iZ**i. 


•y 


has  given  it  a  poetic  garb  in  his  Ode  on  Immortality : 

"  Our  birth  is  but  a  sleep  and  a  forgetting : 
The  soul  that  rises  with  us,  our  life's  star, 
Hath  had  elsewhere  its  setting, 
—  •  And  Cometh  from  afar." 

^ /    '^  De  civit.  Dei,  xi.  23.     Ad  Oros.  c.  Priscill.  et  Orig.  c.  8.     In  his  earlier  work, 
De  libero  arbitrio  (about  395),  he  spoke  more  favorably  of  Pre-existentiani=m. 


832  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

dt^/  w  pre-existence  and  apostasy  of  all  men  in  Adam  i'^-really  liable 
(/  to  similar  objections.  For  he  also  bangs  tbe  whole  fate  of  the 
human  race  on  a  transcendental  act  of  freedom,  lying  beyond 
our  temporal  consciousness ;  though,  it  is  true,  he  places  this 
act  in  the  beginning  of  earthly  history,  and  ascribes  it  to  the 
one  general  ancestor,  while  Origen  transfers  it  into  a  previous 
world,  and  views  it  as  an  act  of  each  individual  soul.' 

But  between  creationism  and  traducianism  Augustine 
wavers,  because  the  Scriptm-es  do  not  expressly  decide.  He 
wishes  to  keep  both  the  continuous  creative  activity  of  God 
and  the  organic  union  of  body  and  soul.  ' 

Augustine  regards  this  whole  question  as  belonging  to 
science  and  the  schools,  not  to  faith  and  the  church,  and  makes 
a  confession  of  ignorance  which,  in  a  man  of  his  speculative 
genius,  involves  great  self-denial.  "  Where  the  Scripture,"  he 
says,  "  renders  no  certain  testimony,  human  inquiry  must  be- 
ware of  deciding  one  way  or  the  other.  If  it  were  necessary 
to  salvation  to  know  anything  concerning  it.  Scripture  would 
have  said  more." ' 


'  Comp.  Baur,  Vorlesungen  iiber  die  Dogmengeschichte,  Bd.  i.  Th.  ii.  p.  31 : 
"  What  essentially  distinguishes  the  Augustinian  system  from  that  of  Origen,  consists 
only  [?]  in  this,  that  in  place  of  the  pretemporal  fall  of  souls  we  have  the  Adamic 
apostasy,  and  that  what  in  Origen  bears  yet  a  heathen  impress,  has  in  Augustine 
assumed  a  purely  Old  Testament  [certainly,  however,  also  a  Pauline]  form." 

"^  De  peccatorum  mer.  et  remiss.  1.  ii.  c.  36,  §  59.  He  still  remained  thus  unde- 
cided in  his  Retractations,  lib.  i.  cap.  1,  §  3  (Opera,  torn.  i.  f.  4),  where  he  honestly 
acknowledges :  "  Quod  attinet  ad  ejus  [animi]  originem  .  .  .  nee  tunc  sciebam,  nee 
adhuc  scio."  He  frequently  treats  of  this  question,  e.  g.,  De  anima  et  ejus  origine ; 
De  Genesi  ad  literam,  x.  23;  Epist.  190  ad  Optatum;  and  Opus  imperf  iv.  104. 
Comp.  also  Gangauf,  1.  c.  p.  248  ff.  and  John  Huber,  Philosophic  der  Kirchenvater, 
p.  291  ff.  Huber  gives  the  following  terse  presentation  of  the  Augustinian  doctrine : 
"  In  the  problem  of  the  origin  of  the  soul  Augustine  arrived  at  no  definite  view. 
In  his  earlier  writings  he  is  as  yet  even  unsettled  as  to  the  doctrine  of  pre-existence 
(De  lib.  arbitr.  i.  12,  24 ;  iiL  20  and  21),  but  afterwards  he  rejects  it  most  decidedly, 
especially  as  presented  by  Origen,  and  at  the  same  time  criticises  his  whole  theory  of 
the  origin  of  the  world  (Do  civit.  Dei,  xi.  23).  In  like  manner  he  declares  against 
the  theory  of  emanation,  according  to  which  the  soul  has  flowed  out  of  God  (Do  Genes, 
ad.  lit.  vii.  2,  3),  is  of  one  nature  (Epist.  166  ad  Hieron.  §  3)  and  coeternal  (De  civ. 
Dei,  X.  31).  Between  creationism  and  generatiouism,  however,  he  can  come  to  no  de- 
cision, being  kept  in  suspense  not  so  much  by  scientific  as  by  theological  considera- 
tions.    As  to  generationism,  he  remembers  TertulUan,  and  fears  being  compelled, 


>  •     z'.   •      /^,/5    r»-f*/^-'"-  ^UU.'>u>^J''^^   ^tUcZ.0,1^^^ 

^.^  f^w  »*--^  -^^^^     w.^<^^  ^  ^  — ^' 


^  §i*^  i^. /^■s'- 


^^^^^^(n/^c^x^y  '''^^  ^  ?^/w-^  /^*«*^^*v^  (^i^c^^j^ 
.^^^  ^..^^  ^  A^-^  ^..^  ^^^  '^  >^ 


-^  .  %■  <!3^yW^    .^4.   -V**^   ^--n^    /-    /^ 


§  155.    DOCTKINE  OF  OPJGIXAL  SIX  AXD  HEKEDITAP.T  GUILT.  833 

Tlie  three  theories  of  the  origin  of  the  soul,  we  may  remark 
by  way  of  concluding  criticism,  admit  of  a  reconciliation. 
Each  of  them  contains  an  element  of  truth,  and  is  wrong  only 
when  exclusively  held.  Every  human  soul  has  an  ideal  pre- 
existence  in  the  divine  mind,  the  divine  will,  and  we  may  add, 
in  the  divine  life;  and  every  human  soul  as  well  as  every 
human  body  is  the  product  of  the  united  agency  of  God  and 
the  parents.  Pre-existentianism  errs  in  confounding  an  ideal 
with  a  concrete,  self-conscious,  individual  pre-existence ;  tra- 
ducianism,  in  ignoring  the  creative  divine  agency  without 
which  no  being,  least  of  all  an  immortal  mind,  can  come  into 
existence,  and  in  favoring  a  materialistic  conception  of  the 
soul;  creatianism,  in  denying  the  human  agency,  and  thus 
placing  the  soul  in  a  merely  accidental  relation  to  the  body.  ^ 

« 

§  155,     Arguments  for  the  Doctrine  of  Original  Sin  and 
Hereditai'y  Guilt. 

We  now  pass  to  the  proofs  by  which  Augustine  established 
his  doctrine  of  original  sin  and  guilt,  and  to  the  objections 
urged  by  his  opponents. 

1.  For  Scriptural  authority  he  appealed  chiefly  and  repeat- 
edly to  the  words  in  Eom.  v.  12,  e'^'  cS  Traz^re?  7]fiapTov,  which 

like  him,  to  affirm  the  corporeality  of  the  soul.  He  perceires,  however,  that  this 
theory  explains  the  transmission  of  original  sin,  and  propomids  the  inquiry,  whether 
perchance  one  soul  may  not  spring  from  another,  as  one  light  is  kindled  from  an- 
other vrithout  diminution  of  its  flame  (Ep.  190  ad  Optatum,  4,  14-15).  But  for 
creationism  the  chief  difficulty  lies  in  this  very  doctrine  of  original  sin.  If  the  soul 
is  created  directly  by  God,  it  is  pure  and  sinless,  and  the  question  arises,  how  it 
has  deserved  to  be  clothed  with  corrupt  flesh  and  brought  into  the  succession  of 
original  sin.  God  Himself  appears  there  to  be  the  cause  of  its  sinfulness,  inasmuch 
as  he  caused  it  to  become  guilty  by  uniting  it  with  the  body  (De  an.  et  ejus  orig.  i. 
8,  9 ;  ii.  9,  13).  All  the  passages  of  Scripture  relevant  to  this  point  agree  only  in 
this,  that  God  is  the  Giver,  Author,  and  Former  of  souls ;  but  how  he  forms  them — 
whether  he  creates  them  out  of  nothing  or  derives  them  from  the  parents,  they  do 
not  declare  (lb.  iv.  11,  15). — His  doctrine,  that  God  created  everything  together  as 
to  the  germ,  might  naturally  have  inclined  him  rather  to  generationism,  yet  he  does 
not  get  over  his  indecision,  and  declares  even  in  his  Retractations  (i.  1,  3),  that  he 
neither  know  previously  nor  knows  now,  whether  succeeding  souls  were  descended 
from  the  first  one  or  newly  created  as  individuals. 
VOL.  II. — 53 


83i  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

are  erroneously  translated  by  the  Yulgate :  in  quo '  omnespec- 

caverurit.     As  Augustine  bad  but  sliglit  knowledge  of  Greek, 

be  commonly  confined  bimself  to  tbe  Latin  Bible,  and  bere  be 

referred  tbe  in  quo  to  Adam  (tbe  "  one  man  "  in  tbe  beginning 

of  tbe  verse,  wbicb  is  far  too  remote) ;  but  tbe  Greek  e^'  c5 

must  be  taken  as  neuter  and  as  a  craij unction  in  tbe  sense: 

on    the    ground    that,   or    because,  i  all    htess    sinned.^      Tbe 

exegesis  of  AugustiDe,/attd~J38s-^Ufti'iue  Ttf  ft  ^^rmnnl  fall^ 

3^,,a&-i^5(ls^ey-©^ail>*n^n-in'^dW^^!«»e  tbgrefore  doubtless  untena- 

ble.     On  tbe  otber  band,  Paul  unquestionably  teacbes  in  tbis 

'v4/tM'^    passage  a  causal  connection  between  sin  and  deatb,  and  also  a 

tJmf^^'^'^  causal  connection  between  tbe  sin  of  Adam  and  tbe  sinfulness 

-^^f^^-  of  bis  posterity,  tberefore  original  sin.     Tbe  proof  of  tbis  is 

Kji  ^  f*^ found  in  tbe  whole  parallel  between  Adam  and  Christ,  and 

^^tA  ^  their  representative  relation  to  mankind  (comp.  1  Cor.  xv.  45 

t '1^  J    ff.)j  and  especially  in  the  Trai/re?  ij/xaprov,  but  not  in  tbe  ecf)  cS 

1^  as  translated  by  tbe  Vulgate  and  Augustine.     Otber  passages 

of  Scripture  to  which  Augustine  appealed,  as  teaching  original 

sin,  were  such  as  Gen.  viii.  21 ;  Ps.  li,  7 ;  John  iii.  6 ;  1  Cor. 

vii.  14 ;  Eph.  ii.  3. 

2.  The  practice  of  infant  baptism  in  tbe  church,  with  the 
customary  formula,  "  for  remission  of  sins,"  and  such  accom- 
panying ceremonies  as  exorcism,  presuj)poses  tbe  dominion  of 
sin  and  of  demoniacal  powers  even  in  infancy.  Since  the 
child,  before  tbe  awakening  of  self- consciousness,  has  committed 
no  actual  sin,  the  effect  of  baptism  must  relate  to  tbe  forgive- 

'  Which  presupposes  eV  S.  The  whole  verse  reads  in  the  Vulgate :  "  Propterea, 
sicut  per  unum  hominem  peccatum  in  hunc  mundum  intravit,  et  per  peccatum  mors, 
et  ita  in  omnes  homines  mors  pertransiit,  in  quo  omnes  peccaverunt."  Comp. 
Augustine,  De  peccat.  merit,  et  remissione,  i.  8,  10 ;  Op.  imperf.  ii.  63 ;  Contra  duas 
ep.  Pel.  iv.  4 ;  De  nupt.  et  concup,  ii.  5.  Pelagius  explained  the  passage  (ad  Rom. 
V.  12):  "In  eo,  quod  omnes  peccaverunt,  exemplo  Adas  peccant,"  or  per  imitatio- 
nem  in  contrast  with  per  propagationem.  Julian  translated  ei/)'  ^  propter  quod. 
Comp.  Contra  Jul.  vi.  15 ;  Op.  imperf.  ii.  66. 

"  'E^'  ^  (=:  icp'  oh)  is  equivalent  to  i-irl  tovtc^  oti,  on  the  ground  that,  presup- 
posing that,  propterea  quod.  So  Meyer,  in  loco,  and  others.  R.  Rothe  (in  an  ex- 
tremely acute  exogetical  monograph  upon  Rom.  v.  12-21,  Wittenberg,  1830)  and 
Chr.  Fr.  Schmid  (Bibl.  Theol.  ii.  p.  126)  explain  icp'  ^  by  iir't  To\n<f  ware,  i.  e., 
under  the  more  particular  specification  that,  inasmuch  as.  Comp.  the  Oomffien- 
tariea.-ft>-u*i '"''' J  '""f  *■*■'""'<"'    ^   "    '^"""^Y^"^  ^-i^c^  <  /^--  -  -  -' f- 

■    -         .    -r    ,  ..   ^       --..-. -  -^^Ji-' 

</     , 


/^Mjumur^a4  otJi  ^^in^jucf' 


§  155.   DOCTRINE  OF  ORIGINAL  Sm  AND  HEEEDITARY  GUILT.    835 

nc53  of  original  sin  and  guilt.'  This  was  a  very  important 
point  from  the  beginning  of  the  controversy,  and  one  to  wliieL 
Augustine  frequently  reverted. 

Here  lie  had  unquestionably  a  logical  advantage  over  the 
Pelagians,  who  retained  the  traditional  usage  of  infant  baptism, 
but  divested  it  of  its  proper  import,  made  it  signify  a  mere 
ennobling  of  a  nature  already  good,  and,  to  be  consistent, 
should  have  limited  baptism  to  adults  for  the  forgiveness  of 
actual  sins. 

The  Pelagians,  however,  were  justly  oflPended  by  the  revolt- 
ing inference  of  the  damnation  of  unbaptized  infants,  which  is 
nowhere  taught  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  is  repugnant  to 
every  unj)erverted  religious  instinct.  Pelagius  inclined  to 
assign  to  unbaptized  infants  a  middle  state  of  half-blessedness, 
between  the  kingdom  of  heaven  appointed  to  the  baptized  and 
the  hell  of  the  ungodly ;  though  on  this  point  he  is  not  posi- 
tive.°  He  evidently  makes  salvation  depend,  not  so  much 
upon  the  Christian  redemption,  as  upon  the  natural  moral 
character  of  individuals.  Hence  also  baptism  had  no  such 
importance  in  his  view  as  in  that  of  his  antagonist. 

Augustine,  on  the  authority  of  Matt.  xxv.  34,  46,  and  other 
Scriptures,  justly  denies  a  neutral  middle  state,  and  meets  the 
difficulty  by  supposing  different  degrees  of  blessedness  and 
damnation  (which,  in  fact,  must  be  admitted),  corresponding 
to  the  different  degrees  of  holiness  and  wickedness.     But,  con- 

^  Comp.  De  nuptiis  et  concup.  i.  c.  26  (torn.  x.  f.  291  sq.);  De  peccai.  mer.  et 
remiss,  i.  c.  26  (§  39,  torn.  x.  fol.  22);  De  gratia  Christi,  c.  32,  33  (x.  245  sq.),  and 
other  passages.  The  relation  of  the  doctrine  of  original  sin  to  the  practice  of  infant 
baptism  came  very  distinctly  into  view  from  the  beginm'ng  of  the  controversy. 
Some  have  even  concluded  from  a  passage  of  Augustine  (De  pecc.  mer.  iii.  6),  that 
the  controversy  began  with  infant  baptism  and  not  with  original  sin.  Comp. 
Wiggers,  i.  p.  59. 

"  "  Quo  non  eant  scio,  quo  eant  nescio,"  says  he  of  unbaptized  children.  He 
ascribed  to  them,  it  is  true,  salus  or  vita  asterna,  but  not  the  regnum  coelorum. 
Aug.  De  pecc.  mer.  et  remLssione,  i.  18 ;  iii.  3.  In  the  latter  place  Augustine  says, 
that  it  is  absurd  to  afiBrm  a  "  vita  seterna  extra  regnum  Dei."  In  his  book,  De 
hffiresibus,  cap.  88,  Augustine  says  of  the  Pelagians  that  they  assign  to  unbaptized 
children  "  seternam  et  beatam  quandam  vitam  extra  regnum  Dei,"  and  teach  that 
children  being  bom  without  original  sin,  are  baptized  for  the  purpose  of  being  ^ 

admitted  "  ad  regnum  Dei,"  and  transferred  "  de  bono  in  mehus." 


S36  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

strained  by  the  idea  of  original  sin,  and  by  tlie  supposed  neces- 
sity of  baptism  to  salvation,  he  does  not  shrink  from  consigning 
iinbaptized  children  to  damnation  itself,'  though  he  softens  to 
the  utmost  this  frightful  dogma,  and  reduces  the  damnation  to 
the  minimum  of  punishment  or  the  privation  of  blessedness.* 
He  might  have  avoided  the  difficulty,  without  prejudice  to 
his  premises,  by  his  doctrine  of  the  election  of  grace,  or  by 
assuming  an  extraordinary  application  of  the  merits  of  Christ  in 
death  or  in  Hades.  But  the  Catholic  doctrine  of  the  necessity 
of  outward  baptism  to  regeneration  and  entrance  into  the  king- 
dom of  God,  forbade  him  a  more  liberal  view  respecting  the 
endless  destiny  of  that  half  of  the  human  race  which  die  in 
childhood. 

We  may  recall,  however,  the  noteworthy  fact,  that  the 
third  canon  of  the  North- African  council  at  Carthage  in  418, 
which  condemns  the  opinion  that  unbaptized  children  are 
saved,  is  in  many  manuscripts  wanting,  and  is  therefore  of 
doubtful  authenticity.  The  sternness  of  the  Augustinian  sys- 
tem here  gave  way  before  the  greater  power  of  Christian  love. 
Even  Augustine,  De-ei^rfcartcrDei,  speaking  of  the  exam^lo  of 
/  61/  Melchisedec,  ventures  the  conjecture,  that  God  may  have  also 
(f  ^  among  the  heathen  an  elect  people,  true  Israelites  according 
ta  the  spirit,  whom  He  draws  to  Himself  through  the  secret 
power  of  His  spirit. '  Why,  we  may  ask,  is  not  this  thought 
applicable  above  all  to  children,  to  whom  we  know  the  Saviour 


h 


"f 


^  De  pecc.  orig.  c.  81  (§  36,  torn.  x.  f.  269):  "Unde  ergo  recte  infans  ilia  pcrdi- 
Hone  pun'dur,  nisi  quia  pertinet  ad  massam  perditionis  ?  "  De  nupt.  et  concup.  c.  22 
(x.  292) :  "  Eemanet  originale  peccatum,  per  quod  [parvuli]  sub  diaboli  potestate 
captivi  sunt,  nisi  inde  lavacro  regenerationis  et  Christi  sanguine  redimantur  et  tran- 
eeant  in  regnum  redemtoris  sui."  De  peccat.  merit,  et  reniissione,  iii.  cap.  4  (x.  "74) : 
"Manifestum  est,  eos  [parvulos]  ad  damnationem,  nisi  hoc  [incorporation  with 
Christ  through  baptism]  eis  collatum  fuerit,  pertinere.  Non  autem  damnari  possent, 
si  peccatum  utique  non  haberent." 

^  Contra  Julianum,  1.  v.  c.  11  (§44,  torn.  x.  f.  651):  "Si  enim  quod  de  Sodomis 
ait  [Matt.  x.  15 ;  xi.  24]  et  utique  non  solis  intelligi  voluit,  alius  alio  tolerabilius  in 
die  judicii  punietur:  quis  dubitaverit  parvulos  non  bapiizatos,  qui  solum  habent 
originale  peccatum,  nee  ullis  propriis  aggravantur,  in  damnatione  omnium  levissima 
futures?"  Comp.  De  pecc.  meritis  et  remissione,  1.  i.  c.  16  (or  §  21,  tom.  x.  12): 
"  Potest  proinde  recte  dici,  parvulos  sine  baptismo  de  corpore  exeuntes  in  damna- 
tione omnium  mitlssbna  futuros." 


§  156.      ANSWERS   TO  PELAGIAN   OBJECTIONS.  837 

Himself,  in  a  very  special  sense  (and  without  reference  to  bap- 
tism) ascribes  a  right  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ? 

3.  The  testimony  of  Scripture  and  of  the  church  is  con- 
firmed by  experience.  The  inclination  to  evil  awakes  with 
the  awaking  of  consciousness  and  voluntary  activity.  Even 
the  suckling  gives  signs  of  self-will,  spite,  and  disobedience. 
As  moral  development  advances,  the  man  feels  this  disposition 
to  be  really  bad,  and  worthy  of  punishment,  not  a  mere  lim- 
itation or  defect.  Thus  we  find  even  the  child  subject  to 
sufiering,  to  sickness,  and  to  death.  It  is  contrary  to  the  pure 
idea  of  God,  that  this  condition  should  have  been  the  original 
one.  God  must  have  created  man  faultless  and  inclined 
towards  good.  The  conviction  that  human  nature  is  not  as  it 
should  be,  in  fact  pervades  all  mankind.  Augustine,  in  one 
place,  cites  a  passage  of  the  third  book  of  Cicero's  Republic : 
"  ]!^ature  has  dealt  with  man  not  as  a  real  mother,  but  as  a 
step-mother,  sending  him  into  the  world  with  a  naked,  frail, 
and  feeble  body,  and  with  a  soul  anxious  to  avoid  burdens, 
bowed  down  under  all  manner  of  apprehensions,  averse  to 
effort,  and  inclined  to  sensuaHty.  Tet  can  we  not  mistake  a 
certain  divine  fire  of  the  spirit,  which  glimmers  on  in  the  heart 
as  it  were  under  ashes."  Cicero  laid  the  blame  of  this  on 
creative  nature.  "  He  thus  saw  clearly  the  fact,  but  not  the 
cause,  for  he  had  no  conception  of  original  sin,  because  he  had 
no  knowledge  of  the  Holy  Scriptm^es." 

§  156.     Answers  to  Pelagian  Objections. 

To  these  positive  arguments  must  be  added  the  direct 
answers  to  the  objections  brought  against  the  Augustinian 
theory,  sometimes  with  great  acuteness,  by  the  Pelagians,  and 
especially  by  Julian  of  Eclanum,  in  the  dialectic  course  of  the 
controversy. 

Julian  sums  up  his  argument  against  Augustine  in  five 
points,  intended  to  disprove  original  sin  fi'om  premises  con- 
ceded by  Augustine  himself:  If  man  is  the  creature  of  God, 
he  must  come  from  the  hands  of  God  good ;  if  marriage  is  in 
itself  good,  it  camiot  generate  evil ;  if  baptism  remits  all  sins 


S38  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

and  regenerates,  the  children  of  the  baptized  cannot  inherit 
sin ;  if  God  is  righteous,  he  cannot  condemn  children  for  the 
sins  of  others ;  if  human  nature  is  capable  of  perfect  righteous- 
ness, it  cannot  be  inherently  defective.' 

"We  notice  particularly  the  first  four  of  these  points ;  the 
fifth  is  substantially  included  in  the  first. 

1.  If  original  sin  propagates  itself  in  generation,  if  there  is 
a  tradux  peccati  and  a  malum  naturdle,  then  sin  is  substantial, 
and  we  are  found  in  the  Manichsean  eiTor,  except  that  we 
make  God,  who  is  the  Father  of  children,  the  author  of  sin, 
while  Manichgeism  refers  sin  to  the  devil,  as  the  father  of 
human  natm'e.^ 

This  imputation  was  urged  repeatedly  and  emphatically  by 
the  sharp  and  clear-sighted  Julian.  But  according  to  Augustine 
all  nature  is,  and  ever  remains,  in  itself  good,  so  far  as  it  is 
natm-e  (in  the  sense  of  creature) ;  evil  is  only  corruption  of 
nature,  vice  cleaving  to  it.  Manichfeus  makes  evil  a  substance, 
Augustine,  only  an  accident ;  the  former  views  it  as  a  positive 
and  eternal  principle,  the  latter  derives  it  fi'om  the  creature, 
and  attributes  to  it  a  merely  negative  or  privative  existence ; 
the  one  afiirms  it  to  be  a  necessity  of  nature,  the  other,  a  free 
act ;  the  former  locates  it  in  matter,  in  the  body,  the  latter,  in 
the  will.'  Augustine  retorted  on  the  Pelagians  the  charge  of 
Manich^ism,  for  their  locating  the  carnal  lust  of  man  in  his 
original  nature  itself,  and  so  precluding  its  cure.  But  in  their 
view  the  concupiscentia  carnis  was  not  what  it  was  to  Augus- 
tine, but  an  innocent  natural  impulse,  which  becomes  sin  only 
when  indulged  to  excess. 

'  Contra  Juliaaum  Pelagianum,  1.  ii.  c.  9  (§  31,  torn.  x.  f.  545  sq.). 

*  Comp.  as  against  this  the  2d  book  De  nuptiis  et  concup. ;  Contra  Jul.  1.  i.  and 
ii.,  and  the  Opus  imperf.,  in  the  introduction,  and  lib.  iv.  cap.  38. 

'  "Xon  est  ulla  substantia  vel  natura,  sed  -ritium."  De  nupt.  et  concup.  1.  ii.  c. 
34  (§  57,  X.  f.  332).  "Xon  ortum  est  malum  nisi  in  bono;  nee  tamen  summo  et 
immutabili,  quod  est  natura  Dei,  sed  facto  de  nihilo  per  sapientiam  Dei."  Ibid.  lib. 
ii.  c.  29  (or  §  50,  torn.  x.  f.  32Y).  Comp.  particularly  also  Contra  duas  epist.  Pelag. 
ii.  c.  2,  where  he  sharply  discriminates  his  doctrine  alike  from  Manichseism  and 
Pelagianism.  These  passages  were  overlooked  by  BArR  and  Milmax,  who  think 
that  there  is  good  foundation  for  the  charge  of  Manich^ism  against  Augustine's 
doctrine  of  sin.  Gibbon  (ch.  sxxiii.)  derived  the  orthodoxy  of  Augustine  from  the 
Manichaean  school ! 


§    156.      ANSWERS   TO   PELAGTAJST    OBJECTIONS.  839 

2.  If  evil  is  nothing  substantial,  we  should  expect  that  the 
baptized  and  regenerate,  in  whom  its  power  is  broken,  would 
beget  sinless  children.  If  sin  is  propagated,  righteousness 
should  be  propagated  also. 

But  baptism,  according  to  Augustine,  removes  only  the 
guilt  (reatus)  of  original  sin,  not  the  sin  itself  {concujpiscentia). 
In  procreation  it  is  not  the  regenerate  spirit  that  is  the  agent, 
but  the  nature  which  is  still  under  the  dominion  of  the  con- 
GujpisGentia.  "  Kegenerate  parents  produce  not  as  sons  of  God, 
but  as  children  of  the  world."  All  that  are  born  need  there- 
fore regeneration  through  the  same  baptism,  which  washes 
away  the  curse  of  original  sin.  Augustine  aj)peals  to  analo- 
gies; especially  to  the  fact  that  from  the  seed  of  the  good 
olive  a  wild  olive  grows,  although  the  good  and  the  wild 
greatly  differ,' 

3,  But  if  the  production  of  children  is  not  possible  without 
fleshly  lust,  must  not  marriage  be  condemned  ?  "^ 

No ;  marriage,  and  the  consequent  production  of  children, 
are,  like  nature,  in  themselves  good.  They  belong  to  the 
mutual  polarity  of  the  sexes.  The  blessing :  "  Be  fruitful  and 
multiply,"  and  the  declaration :  "  Therefore  shall  a  man  leave 
his  father  and  his  mother,  and  shall  cleave  unto  his  wife,  and 
they  shall  be  one  flesh,"  come  down  from  paradise  itself,  and 
generation  would  have  taken  j)lace  even  without  sin,  yet  "  sine 
ulla  libidine,"  as  a  "  tranquilla  motio  et  conjunctio  vel  commixtio 
membrorum."  Carnal  concupiscence  is  subsequent  and  adven- 
titious, existing  now  as  an  accident  in  the  act  of  generation, 
and  concealed  by  nature  herself  with  shame ;  but  it  does  not 
annul  the  blessing  of  marriage.  It  is  only  through  sin  that 
the  sexual  parts  have  hacovaQ  pudenda  ^  in  themselves  they 
are  honorable.     Undoubtedly   the  regenerate   are   called    to 

'  De  peccat.  mer.  et  remiss,  ii.  cap.  9  and  c.  25  ;  De  nuptiis  et  concup.  i.  c.  18 ; 
Contra  Julian,  vi.  c.  5. 

"  Comp.  against  this  especially  the  first  book  De  nuptiis  et  concupiscentia  (torn. 
X.  f.  279  sqq.),  written  418  or  419,  in  order  to  refute  this  objection.  Julian  an- 
swered this  in  a  "work  of  four  books,  which  gave  Augustine  occasion  to  compose  the 
second  book  De  nuptiis  et  concup.,  and  the  six  books  Contra  Julianum,  a.  d.  421. 
JuUan  published  an  answer  to  this  again,  which  Augustine  in  turn  refuted  in  his 
Opus  imperf ,  a.  d.  429,  during  the  writing  of  which  he  died,  a.  d.  430. 


840  THIED   PEKIOD.    A.D,    311-590. 

reduce  concupiscence  to  tlie  mere  service  of  generation,  that 
they  may  produce  children,  who  shall  be  children  of  God,  and 
therefore  born  again  in  Christ.  Such  desire  Augustine,  with 
reference  to  1  Cor.  vii.  3  ff.,  calls  "  a  pardonable  guilt."  But 
since,  in  the  present  state,  the  concupiscentia  carnis  is  insepara- 
ble from  marriage,  it  would  have  been  really  more  consistent 
to  give  up  the  "  bonum  nuptiarum,"  and  to  regard  marriage 
as  a  necessary  evil ;  as  the  monastic  asceticism,  favored  by  the 
spirit  of  the  age,  was  strongly  inclined  to  do.  And  in  this 
respect  there  was  no  material  difference  between  Augustine 
and  Pelagius.  The  latter  went  fully  as  far,  and  even  farther, 
in  his  praise  of  virginity  as  the  highest  form  of  Christian  vir- 
tue ;  his  letter  to  the  nun  Demetrias  is  a  picture  of  a  perfect 
virgin  who  in  her  moral  purity  proves  the  excellency  of  human 
nature. 

4.  It  contradicts  the  righteousness  of  God,  to  suppose  one 
man  punished  for  the  sin  of  another.  We  are  accountable 
only  for  sins  which  are  the  acts  of  our  own  will.  Julian 
appealed  to  the  oft-quoted  passage,  Ezek.  xviii.  2-4,  where 
God  forbids  the  use  of  the  proverb  in  Israel:  "The  fathers 
have  eaten  sour  grapes,  and  the  children's  teeth  are  set  on 
edge,"  and  where  the  principle  is  laid  down :  "  The  soul  that 
sinneth,  it  shall  die."  ^ 

On  the  individualizing  principle  of  Pelagius  this  objection 
is  very  natural,  and  is  irrefragable;  but  in  the  system  of 
Augustine,  where  mankind  appears  as  an  organic  whole,  and 
Adam  as  the  representative  of  human  nature  and  as  including 
all  his  posterity,  it  partially  loses  its  force.  Augustine  thus 
makes  all  men  sharers  in  the  fall,  so  that  they  are,  in  fact, 
punished  for  what  they  themselves  did  in  Adam.  But  this  by 
no  means  fully  solves  the  difficulty.  He  should  have  applied 
•his  organic  view  differently,  and  should  have  carried  it 
farther.  For  if  Adam  must  not  be  isolated  from  his  descend- 
ants, neither  must  original  sin  be  taken  apart  from  actual  sin. 
God  does  not  punish  the  one  without  the  other.  He  always 
looks  upon  the  life  of  man  as  a  whole ;  upon  original  sin  as 

'  Aug.  Opus  imperf.  iii.  18,  19  (torn.  x.  1087,  10G9).     Augustine's  answer  is 
unsatisfactory. 


§  156.      ANSWERS   TO   PELAGIAN   OBJECTIONS.  841 

the  fruitful  mother  of  actual  sins;  and  he  condemns  a  man 
not  for  the  guilt  of  another,  but  for  making  the  deed  of  Adam 
liis  own,  and  repeating  the  fall  by  his  own  voluntary  trans- 
gression. This  every  one  does  who  lives  beyond  unconscious 
infancy.  But  Augustine,  as  we  have  already  seen,  makes 
even  infancy  subject  to  punishment  for  original  sin  alone,  and 
thus  unquestionably  trenches  not  only  upon  the  righteousness 
of  God,  but  also  upon  his  love,  which  is  the  beginning  and 
end  of  his  ways,  and  the  key  to  all  his  works. 

To  sum  up  the  Augustinian  doctrine  of  sin :  This  fearful 
power  is  universal ;  it  rules  the  species,  as  well  as  individuals ; 
it  has  its  seat  in  the  moral  character  of  the  will,  reaches  thence 
to  the  particular  actions,  and  from  them  reacts  again  upon  the 
will;  and  it  subjects  every  man,  without  exception,  to  the 
punitive  justice  of  God.  Yet  the  corruption  is  not  so  great  as 
to  alter  the  substance  of  man,  and  make  him  incapable  of 
redemption.  The  denial  of  man's  cayacity  for  redemption  is 
the  ManichiEan  error,  and  the  opposite  extreme  to  the  Pelagian 
denial  of  the  need  of  redemption.  "  That  is  still  good,"  says 
Augustine,  "  which  bewails  lost  good ;  for  had  not  something 
good  remained  in  our  nature,  there  would  be  no  grief  over  lost 
good  for  punishment." '  Even  in  the  hearts  of  the  heathen 
the  law  of  God  is  not  wholly  obliterated,^  and  even  in  the  life 
of  the  most  abandoned  men  there  are  some  good  works.  But 
these  avail  nothing  to  salvation.  They  are  not  truly  good, 
because  they  proceed  from  the  turbid  source  of  selfishness. 
Faith  is  the  root,  and  love  the  motive,  of  all  truly  good  actions, 
and  this  love  is  shed  abroad  in  our  hearts  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 
"Whatsoever  is  not  of  faith,  is  sin."  Before  the  time  of 
Christ,  therefore,  all  virtues  were  either,  like  the  virtues  of  the 
Old  Testament  saints,  who  hoped  in  the  same  Christ  in  whom 
we  believe,  consciously  or  unconsciously  Christian ;  or  else 
they  prove,  on  closer  inspection,  to  be  comparative  vices  or 
seeming  virtues,  destitute  of  the  pure  motive  and  the  right 
aim.     Lust  of  renoAvn  and  lust  of  dominion  w^ere  the  funda- 

'  De  Genesi  ad  literam,  viii.  14. 
"  Rom.  ii.  14. 


842  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

mental  traits  of  tlie  old  Romans,  which  first  gave  birth  to 
those  virtues  of  self-devotion  to  freedom  and  country,  so  glo- 
rious in  the  eyes  of  men ;  but  which  afterwards,  when  with  the 
destruction  of  Carthage  all  manner  of  moral  corruption  poured 
in,  begot  the  Roman  vices. ^ 

This  view  of  heathen  or  natural  morality  as  a  specious 
form  of  vice,  though  true  to  a  large  extent,  is  nevertheless  an 
unjust  extreme,  which  Augustine  himself  canuot  consistently 
sustain.  Even  he  was  forced  to  admit  important  moral  differ- 
ences among  the  heathen :  between,  for  example,  a  Fabricius, 
of  incorruptible  integrity,  and  the  traitor  Catiline ;  and  though 
he  merely  defines  this  diflerence  negatively,  as  a  greater  and 
less  degree  of  sin  and  guilt,  yet  this  itself  involves  the  positive 

^  The  sentence  often  ascribed  to  Augustine,  that  "all  pagan  virtues  are  but  splen- 
did vices,"  is  not  Augustinian  in  form,  but  in  substance.  Comp.  the  quotation  and 
remarks  above,  §  151.  Dr.  Baur  states  his  view  correctly  and  clearly  when  he  says 
(Vorlesungen  iiber  die  Dogmengeschichte,  Bd.  i.  Part  2,  p.  342):  "If,  as  Augustine 
taught,  faith  in  Christ  is  the  highest  principle  of  willing  and  acting,  nothing  can  be 
truly  good,  which  has  not  its  root  in  faith,  which  principle  Augustine  thus  expressed, 
using  the  words  of  the  apostle  Paul,  Piom.  xiv.  23  :  *  Omne,  quod  non  ex  fide,  pecca- 
tum.'  Augustine  judged  therefore  all  good  in  the  wiU  and  act  of  man  after  the 
absolute  standard  of  Christian  good,  and  accordingly  could  only  regard  the  virtues 
of  the  heathen  as  seeming  virtues,  and  ascribe  to  anything  pre-Christian  an  inner 
value  only  so  far  as  it  had  an  inner  reference  to  faith  in  Christ."  Comp.  also  Baur's 
Geschichte  der  christl.  Kirche  vom  4-6ten  Jahrhundert,  p.  153  ff.  Neander  repre- 
sents Augustine's  doctrine  on  heathen  virtue  thus  (Church  History,  vol.  iv.  1161, 
2d  Germ,  ed.,  or  vol.  ii.  p.  620,  in  Torrey's  translation):  "  Augustine  very  justly 
distinguishes  the  patriotism  of  the  ancients  from  that  which  is  to  be  called  '  virtue,' 
in  the  genuinely  Christian  sense,  and  which  depends  on  the  disposition  towards  God 
(virtus  from  virtus  vera) ;  but  then  he  goes  so  far  as  to  overlook  altogether  what 
bears  some  relationship  to  the  divine  life  in  such  occasional  coruscations  of  the 
moral  element  of  human  nature,  and  to  see  in  them  nothing  but  a  service  done  for 
evil  spirits  and  for  man's  glory.  He  contributed  greatly,  on  this  particular  side,  to 
promote  in  the  Western  church  the  partial  and  contracted  way  of  judging  the  ancient 
pagan  times,  as  opposed  to  the  more  liberal  Alexandrian  views  of  which  we  still  find 
traces  in  many  of  the  Orientals  in  this  period,  and  to  which  Augustine  himself,  in 
the  earlier  part  of  his  life,  as  a  Platonist,  had  been  inclined.  Still  the  vestiges  of 
his  earlier  and  loftier  mode  of  thinking  are  to  be  discerned  in  his  later  writings, 
where  he  searches  after  and  recognizes  the  scattered  fragments  of  truth  and  good- 
ness in  the  pagan  literature,  which  he  uniformly  traces  to  the  revelation  of  the  Spirit, 
who  is  the  original  source  of  all  that  is  true  and  good,  to  created  minds ;  though 
this  is  inconsistent  with  his  own  theory  respecting  the  total  corruption  of  human 
nature,  and  with  the  particularism  of  his  doctrine  of  predestination." 


\ 


/g^    ^j^"ia«ra^ e/  /n^'^'A:^  *^,  ^*<'  ■"'^ 

,6;^  .fe..^^*,  izw^^'^^^  r^'<f^ ':  '^ 


.e<#^2c_ 


»-/-^^^^u^j( 


^.  A.   ^>»^^*^^**v;  6^ 


§  157.    Augustine's  docteine  of  kedeeming  grace.   843 

concession,  that  Fabricius  stands  nearer  the  position  of  Chris- 
tian moralitj.  and  that  there  exists  at  least  relative  goodness 
among  the  heathen.  Moreover,  he  cannot  deny,  that  there 
were  before  Christ,  not  only  among  the  Israelites,  but  also 
among  the  Gentiles,  God-fearing  souls,  such  as  Melchisedec 
and  Job,  true  Israelites,  not  according  to  the  flesh,  but 
according  to  the  spirit,  whom  God  by  the  secret  workings  of 
His  Sj^irit  drew  to  Himself  even  without  baptism  and  the 
external  means  of  grace.'  So  the  Alexandrian  fathers  saw 
scattered  rays  of  the  Logos  in  the  dark  night  of  heathenism ; 
only  they  were  far  from  discriminating  so  sharply  between 
what  was  Christian  and  what  was  not  Christian, 

All  human  boasting  is  therefore  excluded,  man  is  sick,  sick 
unto  death  out  of  Christ,  but  he  is  capable  of  health ;  and  the 
worse  the  sickness,  the  greater  is  the  physician,  the  more 
powerful  is  the  remedy — redeeming  grace. 

§  157.     Augustine's  Doctrine  of  Redeeming  Grace. 

Augustine  reaches  his  peculiar  doctrine  of  redeeming 
grace  in  two  ways.  First  he  reasons  upwards  from  below,  by 
the  law  of  contrast ;  that  is,  from  his  view  of  the  utter  incom- 
petency of  the  unregenerated  man  to  do  good.  The  greater 
the  corruption,  the  mightier  must  be  the  remedial  principle. 
The  doctrine  of  grace  is  thus  only  the  positive  counterpart  of 
the  doctrine  of  sin.  In  the  second  place  he  reasons  down- 
wards from  above;  that  is,  from  his  conception  of  the  all- 
working,  all-penetrating  presence  of  God  in  natural  life,  and 
much  more  in  the  spiritual.  While  Pelagius  deistically  severs 
God  and  the  world  after  the  creation,  and  places  man  on  an 
independent  footing,  Augustine,  even  before  this  controversy, 

*  Comp.  De  peccat.  orig.  c.  24  (§  28,  torn.  x.  f.  265),  where  he  asserts  that  the 
grace  and  faith  "•of  X^hrist  operated  even  unconsciously  "sive  in  eis  justis  quos 
sancta  Scriptura  commemorat,  sive  in  eis  justis  quos  quidem  ilia  non  commemorat, 
sed  tamen  fuisse  credendi  sunt,  vel  ante  diluvium,  vel  inde  usque  ad  legem 
datam,  vel  ipsius  legis  tempore,  non  solum  in  filiia  Israel,  sicut  fuerunt  prophetae, 
sed  etiam  extra  eundem  populum,  sicut  fuit  Job.  Et  ipsorum  euim  corda  eadem 
mundabautur  mediatoris  fide,  et  difFundebatur  in  eis  caritas  per  Spiritum  Sanctum, 
qui  ubi  vult  spirat,  non  merita  sequens,  sed  etiam  ipsa  merita  faciens.". 


-T^M^U)  i»f£ 


844  THIKD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590, 

was,  through  his  speculative  genius  and  the  eai-nest  experience 
of  his  life,  deeply  penetrated  Avith.  a  sense  of  the  absolute 
dependence  of  the  creature  on  the  Creator,  in  whom  we  live, 
and  move,  and  have  our  being.  But  Augustine's  impression 
of  the  immanence  of  God  in  the  world  has  nothing  pantheistic ; 
it  does  not  tempt  him  to  deny  the  transcendence  of  God 
and  his  absolute  independence  of  the  world.  Guided  by  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  he  maintains  the  true  mean  between  deism 
and  pantheism.  In  the  very  beginning  of  his  Confessions '  lie 
says  very  beautifully :  "  How  shall  I  call  on  my  God,  on  my 
God  and  Lord  ?  Into  myself  must  I  call  Him,  if  I  #all  on 
Him ;  and  what  place  is  there  in  me,  where  my  God  may 
enter  into  me,  the  God,  who  created  heaven  and  earth?  O 
Lord  my  God,  is  there  anything  in  me,  that  contains  Thee  ? 
Do  heaven  and  earth  contain  Thee,  which  Thou  hast  created, 
in  which  Thou  didst  create  me  ?  Or  does  all  that  is,  contain 
Thee,  because  without  Thee  there  had  existed  nothing  that  is  ? 
Because  then  I  also  am,  do  I  supplicate  Thee,  that  Thou 
wouldst  come  into  me,  I,  who  had  not  in  any  wise  been,  if 
Thou  wert  not  in  me?  I  yet  live,  I  do  not  yet  sink  into  the 
lower  world,  and  yet  Thou  art  there.  If  I  made  my  bed  in 
hell,  behold.  Thou  art  there.  I  were  not,  then,  O  my  God, 
I  utterly  were  not,  if  Thou  wert  not  in  me.  Yea,  still  more, 
I  were  not,  O  my  God,  if  I  were  not  in  Thee,  from  whom  all, 
in  whom  all,  through  whom  all  is.  Even  so,  Lord,  even  so." 
In  short,  man  is  nothing  without  God,  and  everything  in  and 
through  God.  The  undercm^rent  of  this  sentiment  could  not 
but  carry  this  father  onward  to  all  the  views  he  developed  in 
opposition  to  the  Pelagian  heresy. 

While  Pelagius  widened  the  idea  of  grace  to  indefiniteness, 
and  reduced  it  to  a  medley  of  natural  gifts,  law,  gospel,  for- 
giveness of  sins,  enhghtenment,  and  example,  Augustine  restrict- 
ed grace  to  the  specifically  Christian  sphere  (and,  therefore, 
called  it  gratia  Christi),  though  admitting  its  operation  pre- 
vious to  Christ  among  the  saints  of  the  Jewish  dispensation ; 
but  within  this  sphere  he  gave  it  incomparably  greater  depth. 
"With  him  grace  is,  first  of  all,  a  creative  power  of  God  in 

'  Libcr  i.  c.  2. 


§  157.     Augustine's  doctrine  of  eedeeming  grace.    845 

Christ  transforming  men  from  within.  It  produces  first  tlie 
negative  effect  of  forgiveness  of  sins,  removing  the  hindrance 
to  communion  with  God  ;  then  the  positive  communication  of 
a  new  principle  of  life.  The  two  are  combined  in  the  idea  of 
justification,  which,  as  we  have  already  remarked,  Augustine 
holds,  not  in  the  Protestant  sense  of  declaring  righteous  once 
for  all,  but  in  the  Catholic  sense  of  gradually  making  right- 
eous; thus  substantially  identifying  it  with  sanctification.* 
Yet,  as  he  refers  this  whole  process  to  divine  grace,  to  the 
exclusion  of  all  human  merit,  he  stands  on  essentially  Evan- 
gelical ground."  As  we  inherit  fi-om  the  first  Adam  our  sinful 
and  mortal  life,  so  the  second  Adam  implants  in  us,  from  God, 
and  in  God,  the  germ  of  a  sinless  and  immortal  life.  Positive 
grace  operates,  therefore,  not  merely  from  without  upon  our 
intelligence  by  instruction  and  admonition,  as  Pelagius  taught, 
but  also  in  the  centre  of  our  personality,  imparting  to  the  will 
the  power  to  do  the  good  which  the  instruction  teaches,  and  to 
imitate  the  example  of  Christ.^  Hence  he  frequently  calls  it 
the  inspiration  of  a  good  will,  or  of  love,  which  is  the  fulfilling 
of  the  law.^  "  Him  that  wills  not,  grace  comes  to  meet,  that 
he  may  will ;  him  that  wills,  she  follows  up,  that  he  may  not 
will  in  vain."  °  Faith  itself  is  an  eflect  of  grace ;  indeed,  its 
first  and  fundamental  efi'ect,  which  provides  for  all  others,  and 
manifests  itself  in  love.  He  had  formerly  held  faith  to  be  a 
work  of  man  (as,  in  fact,  though  not  exclusively,  the  capacity 

*  De  spiritu  et  litera,  c.  26  (torn.  s.  f.  109) :  "  Quid  est  enim  aliud,  justificatj, 
quam  jusii  fadi,  ab  illo  scilicet  qui  justificat  impium,  ut  ex  impio  fiat  Justus  ?  " 
Retract,  ii.  33  :  "  Justificamur  gratia  Dei,  hoc  est,  justi  efficimur." 

'  Comp.  De  gratia  et  libero  arbitrio,  c.  8  (§  19),  and  many  other  places,  where 
he  ascribes  fides,  caritas,  omnia  bona  opera,  and  vita  tctema  to  the  free,  unmerited 
grace  of  God. 

^  "  Xon  lege  atque  doctrina  insonante  forinsecus,  sed  interna  et  occulta,  mirabili 
ac  ineffabili  potestate  operatur  Deus  in  cordibus  hominum  non  solum  veras  revela- 
tiones,  sed  bonas  etiam  voluntates."    De  grat.  Christi,  cap.  24  (x.  f.  24). 

*  De  corrept.  et  grat.  cap.  2  (x.  lol):  "Inspiratio  bonse  voluntatis  atque 
opens."  Without  this  grace  men  can  "  nullum  prorsus  sive  cogitando,  sive  volendo 
et  amando,  sive  agendo  facere  bonum."  Elsewhere  he  calls  it  also  "inspiratio 
dilectionis  "  and  "  caritatis."     C.  duas  epist.  Pel.  iv.,  and  De  gratia  Christi,  39, 

*  "Xolenteip  prsevenit,  ut  velit;  volentem  subsequitur,  ne  frustra  veht." 
Enchir.  c.  32. 


846  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

of  faith,  or  receptivity  for  the  divine,  may  be  said  to  be) ;  but 
he  was  afterwards  led,  particularly  by  the  words  of  Paul  in 
1  Cor.  iv.  7 :  "  What  hast  thou,  that  thou  hast  not  received  ? " 
to  change  his  view.*  In  a  word,  grace  is  the  breath  and  blood 
of  the  new  man ;  from  it  proceeds  all  that  is  truly  good  and 
divine,  and  without  it  we  can  do  nothing  acceptable  to 
God. 

From  this  fundamental  conception  of  grace  arise  the  several 
properties  which  Augustine  ascribes  to  it  in  opposition  to 
Pelagius : 

First,  it  is  absolutely  necessary  to  Christian  virtue;  not 
merely  auxiliary,  but  indispensable,  to  its  existence.  It  is 
necessary  "for  every  good  act,  for  every  good  thought,  for 
every  good  word  of  man  at  every  moment."  Without  it  the 
Christian  life  can  neither  begin,  proceed,  nor  be  consummated. 
It  was  necessary  even  under  the  old  dispensation,  which  con- 
tained the  gospel  in  the  form  of  promise.  The  saints  before 
Christ  lived  of  His  grace  by  anticipation.  "  They  stood,"  says 
Augustine,  "not  under  the  terrifying,  convicting,  punishing 
law,  but  under  that  grace  which  fills  the  heart  with  joy  in 
what  is  good,  which  heals  it,  and  makes  it  free."  '^ 

It  is,  moreover,  unmerited.  Gratia  would  be  no  gratia  if 
it  were  not  gratuita,  gratis  data^  As  man  without  grace  can 
do  nothing  good,  he  is,  of  course,  incapable  of  deserving  grace ; 
for,  to  deserve  grace,  he  must  do  something  good.  "What 
merits  could  we  have,  while  as  yet  we  did  not  love  God? 
That  the  love  with  which  we  should  love  might  be  created,  we 
have  been  loved,  while  as  yet  we  had  not  that  love.  ISTever 
should  we  have  found  strength  to  love  God,  except  as  we 
received  such  a  love  from  Him  who  had  loved  us  before,  and 
because  He  had  loved  us  before.     And,  without  such  a  love, 

'  Comp.  Retract,  i.  c.  23  ;  De  dono  perseverantife,  c.  20,  and  De  prsedest.  c.  2, 
*  "  Erant  tamen  et  legia  tempore  homines  Dei,  non  sub  lege  terrente.  convin- 

cente,  puniente,  sed  sub  gratia  delectante,  sanante,  liberaute."     De  grat.  Christi  et 

de  peccato  origin.  1.  ii.  c.  25  (§  29). 

^  Comp.  De  gestis  Pelagii,  §  33  (x.  210);  De  pecc.  orig.  §  28  (x.  265):  "Non 

Dei  gratia  erit  uUo  modo,  nisi  gratuita  fuerit  omni  modo."    In  many  other  passages 

he  savs :  gratia  gratis  datur ;  gratia  prtecedit  bona  opera ;  gratia  prsecedit  merita ; 

gratia  indlgnis  datur. 


§  157.    Augustine's  doctkine  of  kedeeming  geace.   8^7 

what  good  could  we  do  ?  Or,  bow  could  we  not  do  good,  witli 
such  a  love  ? "  "  The  Holy  Spirit  breathes  where  He  will, 
and  does  not  follow  merits,  but  Himself  produces  the  merits ! ' 
Grace,  therefore,  is  not  bestowed  on  man  hecause  he  already 
believes,  but  that  he  may  believe ;  not  hecause  he  has  deserved 
it  by  good  works,  but  that  he  may  deserve  good  works." 
Pelagius  reverses  the  natural  relation  by  making  the  cause  the 
eflfect,  and  the  effect  the  cause.  The  ground  of  our  salvation 
can  only  be  found  in  God  Himself,  if  He  is  to  remain  immuta- 
ble. Augustine  appeals  to  examples  of  pardoned  sinners, 
"  where  not  only  no  good  deserts,  but  even  evil  deserts,  had 
preceded."  Thus  the  apostle  Paul,  "averse  to  the  faith, 
which  he  wasted,  and  vehemently  inflamed  against  it,  was 
suddenly  converted  to  that  faith  by  the  prevailing  power  of 
grace,  and  that  in  such  wise  that  he  was  changed  not  only 
from  an  enemy  to  a  friend,  but  from  a  persecutor  to  a  sufferer 
of  persecution  for  the  sake  of  the  faith  he  had  once  destroyed. 
For  to  him  it  was  given  by  Christ,  not  only  to  believe  on  him, 
but  also  to  suffer  for  his  sake."  He  also  points  to  children, 
who  without  will,  and  therefore  without  voluntary  merit  pre- 
ceding, are  through  holy  baptism  incorporated  in  the  kingdom 
of  grace."  His  own  experience,  finally,  afforded  him  an  argu- 
ment, to  him  irrefutable,  for  the  free,  undeserved  compassion 
of  God.  And  if  in  other  passages  he  speaks  of  merits,  he 
means  good  works  which  the  Holy  Ghost  effects  in  man,  and 
which  God  graciously  rewards,  so  that  eternal  life  is  grace  for 
grace.  "  If  all  thy  merits  are  gifts  of  God,  God  crowns  thy 
merits  not  as  thy  merits,  but  as  the  gifts  of  his  grace."  ' 

'  De  pecc.  orig.  §  28  (x.  265):  "Et  ipsorum  [prophetarum]  corda  eadem  mun- 
dabantur  mediatoris  fide,  et  difiFundebatur  in  eis  caritas  per  Spiritum  Sanctum,  qui 
ubi  vult  spirat,  non  merita  sequens,  sed  etiam  ipsa  merita  faciens." 

'  De  gratia  et  libero  arbitrio,  cap.  22  (§  44,  torn.  x.  f.  '742).  Parvuli,  he  says, 
have  no  will  to  receive  grace,  nay,  often  struggle  -vrith  tears  against  being  baptized, 
"  quod  eis  ad  magnum  impietatis  peccatum  imputaretur,  si  jam  libero  uterentur 
arbitrio :  et  tamen  hseret  etiam  in  reluctantibus  gratia,  apertissime  nullo  bono 
merito  prascedente,  alioquin  gratia  jam  non  esset  gratia."  He  then  calls  attention 
to  the  fact  that  grace  is  sometimes  bestowed  on  children  of  imbelievers,  and  is  with- 
held from  many  children  of  believers. 

'  De  grat.  et  lib.  arbitrio,  e.  6  (f.  '726),  where  Augustme,  from  passages  like 


848  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Grace  is  irresistible  in  its  effect ;  not,  indeed,  in  tlie  way 
of  physical  constraint  imposed  on  the  will,  but  as  a  moral 
power,  which  makes  man  willing,  and  which  infallibly  attains 
its  end,  the  conversion  and  final  perfection  of  its  subject.' 
This  point  is  closely  connected  with  Augustine's  whole  doc- 
trine of  predestination,  and  consistently  leads  to  it  or  follows 
from  it.  Plence  the  Pelagians  repeatedly  raised  the  charge 
that  Augustine,  under  the  name  of  grace,  introduced  a  certain 
fatalism.  But  the  irresistibility  must  manifestly  not  be  ex- 
tended to  all  the  influences  of  grace ;  for  the  Bible  often  speaks 
of  grieving,  quenching,  lying  to,  and  blaspheming  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  so  implies  that  grace  may  be  resisted;  and  it 
presents  many  living  examples  of  such  resistance.  It  cannot 
be  denied,  that  Saul,  Solomon,  Ananias,  and  Sapphira,  and 
even  the  traitor  Judas,  were  under  the  influence  of  divine 
grace,  and  repelled  it.  Augustine,  therefore,  must  make  irre- 
sistible grace  identical  with  the  specific  grace  of  regeneration 
in  the  elect,  which  at  the  same  time  imparts  the  donum,  jperse- 
veranticB^^ 

James  i.  n  ;  Johniii.  27;  Eph.  ii.  8,  draws  the  conclusion:  "Si  ergo  Dei  dona 
sunt  bona  merita  tua,  non  Deus  coronat  merita  tua  tamquam  merita  tua,  sed  tam- 
quam  dona  sua." 

*  "SubTentum  est  infirmitati  voluntatis  humanae,  ut  divina  gratia  indeclina- 
Hliter  et  insuperabiliter  [not  inseparabiliter,  as  the  Jesuit  edition  of  Louvain,  IS'ZV, 
reads]  ageretur ;  et  ideo,  quamvis  infirma,  non  tamen  deficeret,  neque  adversitate 
aliqua  vinceretur."    De  corrept.  et  grat.  §  38  (torn.  x.  p.  VZl). 

'It  is  in  this  sense  that  the  Calvinistic  theologians  have  always  understood  the 
Augustinian  system,  especially  the  Presbyterians.  So,  e.  g.,  Dr.  Ounningham  (1.  c.  vol. 
ii.  p.  352) ;  "  Augustine,  in  asserting  the  invincibility  or  irresistibility  of  grace,  did 
not  mean — and  those  who  in  subsequent  times  have  embraced  this  general  system 
of  doctrine  as  scriptural,  did  not  intend  to  convey  the  idea — that  man  was  com- 
pelled to  do  that  which  was  good,  or  that  he  was  forced  to  repent  and  believe 
against  his  will,  whether  he  would  or  not,  as  the  doctrine  is  commonly  misrepre- 
sented, but  merely  that  he  was  certainly  and  effectually  made  willing,  by  the  reno- 
vation of  his  will  through  the  power  of  God,  whenever  that  power  was  put  forth  in  a 
measure  sufficient  and  adequate  to  produce  the  result.  Augustine,  and  those  who 
have  adopted  his  system,  did  not  mean  to  deny  that  men  may,  in  some  sense  and  to 
some  extent,  resist  the  Spirit,  the  possibility  of  which  is  clearly  indicated  in  Scrip- 
ture ;  inasmuch  as  they  have  most  commonly  held  that,  to  use  the  language  of  our 
[the  Westminster]  Confession,  'persons  who  are  not  elected,  and  who  finally  perish, 
may  have  some  common  operations  of  the  Spirit,'  which,  of  course,  they  resist  and 
throw  off."     Similarly  Dr.  Suedd  (Hist,  of  Doct.  vol.  ii.  73),  who,  however,  extends 


§  157.    Augustine's  doctrine  of  redeeming  grace.    849 

Grace,  finally,  works  progressively  or  hy  degrees.  It  re- 
moves all  the  consequences  of  the  fall;  but  it  removes  them  in 
an  order  agreeable  to  the  finite,  gradually  unfolding  nature  of 
the  believer.  Grace  is  a  foster-mother,  who  for  the  greatest 
good  of  her  charge,  wisely  and  lovingly  accommodates  herself 
to  his  necessities  as  they  change  fii-om  time  to  time.  Augustine 
gives  diff'erent  names  to  grace  in  these  difierent  steps  of  its 
development.  In  overcoming  the  resisting  will,  and  impart- 
ing a  living  knowledge  of  sin  and  longing  for  redemption, 
grace  is  gratia  prceveniens  or  prcejMrans.  In  creating  faith 
and  the  free  will  to  do  good,  and  uniting  the  soul  to  Christ,  it 
is  gratia  operans.  Joining  with  the  emancipated  will  to  com- 
bat the  remains  of  evil,  and  bringing  forth  good  works  as  fruits 
of  faith,  it  is  gratia  coojperans.  Finally,  in  enabling  the  be- 
liever to  persevere  in  faith  to  the  end,  and  leading  him  at 
length,  though  not  in  this  hfe,  to  the  perfect  state,  in  which  he 
can  no  longer  sin  nor  die,  it  is  gratia perficiens.^  This  includes 
the  donum  perseveranticB,  which  is  the  only  certain  token  of 

irresistible  grace  to  all  the  regenerate.  "  Not  all  grace,"  he  says,  "  but  the  grace 
which  actually  regenerates,  Augustine  denominates  irresistible.  By  this  he  meant, 
not  that  the  human  will  is  converted  unwillingly  or  by  compulsion,  but  that  divine 
grace  is  able  to  overcome  the  utmost  obstinacy  of  the  human  spirit.  .  .  .  Divine 
grace  is  irresistible,  not  in  the  sense  that  no  form  of  grace  is  resisted  by  the  sinner ; 
but  when  grace  reaches  that  special  degree  which  constitutes  it  regenerating,  it  then 
overcomes  the  sinner's  opposition,  and  makes  him  willing  in  the  day  of  God's 
power."  This  is  Calvinistic,  but  not  Augustinian,  although  given  as  Augustine's 
view.  For  according  to  Augustine  all  the  baptized  are  regenerate,  and  yet  many 
are  eternally  lost.  (Comp.  Ep.  98,  2  ;  De  pecc.  mer.  et  rem.  i.  39,  and  the  passages 
in  Eagenbach's  Doctrine  History,  vol.  i.  p.  858  ff.  in  the  Anglo-American  edition.) 
The  gratia  irresistibilis  must  therefore  be  restricted  to  the  narrower  circle  of  the 
eledi.  Augustine's  doctrine  of  baptism  is  far  more  Lutheran  and  CathoUc  than 
Calvinistic.  According  to  Calvin,  the  regenerating  effect  of  baptism  is  dependent 
on  the  decretum  divimcm,  and  the  truly  regenerate  is  also  elect,  and  therefore  can 
never  finally  fall  from  grace.  Augustine,  for  the  honor  of  the  sacrament,  assumes 
the  possibihty  of  a  fruitless  regeneration ;  Calvin,  in  the  interest  of  election  and 
regeneration,  assumes  the  possibihty  of  an  ineffectual  baptism. 

*  Summing  all  the  stages  together,  Augustine  says:  "Et  quis  istam  etsi  parvam 
dare  cceperat  caritatem,  nisi  ille  qui  prceparat  voluntatem,  et  cooperando  pcrficit, 
quod  operando  incipii?  Quoniam  ipse  ut  veUmus  operatur  incipiens,  qui  volentibus 
cooperatur  perficiens.  Propter  quod  ait  Apostolus:  Certus  sum,  quoniam  qui 
operatur  in  vobis  opus  bonum,  perficiet  usque  in  diem  Christi  Jesu "  (Phil.  i.  6). 
De  grat.  et  lib.  arbitr.  c.  27,  §  33  (torn.  x.  YSS). 
VOL.  II. — 54 


850  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

election.^  "  We  call  ourselves  elect,  or  cMldren  of  God,  be- 
cause we  so  call  all  those  whom  we  see  regenerate,  visibly 
leading  a  holy  life.  But  he  alone  is  in  truth  what  he  is  called, 
who  perseveres  in  that  from  which  he  receives  the  name." 
Therefore  so  long  as  a  man  yet  lives,  we  can  form  no  certain 
judgment  of  him  in  this  respect.  Perseverance  till  death,  i.  e., 
to  the  point  where  the  danger  of  apostasy  ceases,  is  emphat- 
ically a  grace,  "  since  it  is  much  harder  to  possess  this  gift  of 
grace  than  any  other;  though  for  him  to  whom  nothing  i& 
hard,  it  is  as  easy  to  bestow  the  one  as  the  other." 

And  as  to  the  relation  of  grace  to  freedom :  ISTeither  ex- 
cludes the  other,  though  they  might  appear  to  conflict.  In 
Augustine's  system  freedom,  or  self-determination  to  good,  is 
the  correlative  in  man  of  grace  on  the  part  of  God.  The  more 
grace,  the  more  freedom  to  do  good,  and  the  more  joy  in  the 
good.  The  two  are  one  in  the  idea  of  love,  which  is  objective 
and  subjective,  passive  and  active,  an  apprehending  and  a 
being  apprehended.^ 

We  may  sum  up  the  Augustinian  anthropology  under  these 
three  heads : 

1.  The  Primitive  State;  Immediate,  undeveloped  unity 
of  man  with  God ;  child-like  innocence ;  germ  and  condition 
of  everything  subsequent ;  possibility  of  a  sinless  and  a  sinful 
development. 

2.  The  State  of  Sm:  Alienation  from  God;  bondage; 
dominion  of  death ;  with  longing  after  redemption. 

3.  The  State  of  Pedemption  ok  of  Geace:  Higlier, 
mediated  unity  with  God ;  virtue  approved  through  conflict ; 
the  blessed  freedom  of  the  children  of  God ;  here,  indeed,  yet 
clogged  with  the  remains  of  sin  and  death,  but  hereafter  abso- 
lutely perfect,  witliout  the  possibility  of  apostasy. 

'  Augustine  treats  of  this  ia  the  Liber  dc  dono  persevcranticc,  one  of  his  latest 
writings,  composed  in  428  or  429  (torn.  x.  f.  821  sqq.). 

^  Comp.  upon  this  especially  the  book  De  gratia  et  libcro  arbitrio,  which  Augus- 
tine wrote  A.  D.  426,  addressed  to  Valentinus  and  other  monies  of  Adnimetum,  to 
refute  the  false  reasoning  of  those,  "qui  sic  gratiam  Dei  defcndunt,  ut  uegent 
hominis  liberum  arbitrium"  (c.  1,  torn.  x.  f.  1\^). 


158.      THE   DOCTRINE   OF   PKEDESTINATION.  851 


§  158.     The  Doctrine  of  Predestination. 

I.  AuGusTiNrs :  De  praadestinatione  sanctorum  ad  Prosperum  et  Hilarium 

(written  a,  d.  428  or  429  against  the  Semi-Pelagians)  ;  De  dono  perse- 
verantia)  (written  in  the  same  year  and  against  the  same  opponents) ; 
De  gratia  et  libero  ai-bitrio  (written  a.  d.  426  or  427  ad  Valentinum  et 
Monachos  Adrumetinos) ;  De  correptione  et  gratia  (written  to  the 
same  persons  and  in  the  same  year). 

II.  CoEN.  Jansenitjs  :  Augustinus.    Lovan.  1640,  torn.  iii.    Jao.  Skmojto 

(Jesuit):  Historia  prsedestinatiana.  Par.  1648  (and  in  his  Opera,  turn. 
iv.  p.  271).  Gael  Beck  :  Die  Augustinische,  Calvinistische  und  Luthe- 
rische  Lehre  von  der  Prtidestination  aus  den  Quellen  dargestellt  und 
mit  besonderer  Riicksicht  auf  Schleiermacher's  Erwiihlungslehre  com- 
parativ  beurtheUt,  "  Studien  und  Kritiken,"  1847.  J.  B,  Mozley  : 
Augustinian  Doctrine  of  Predestination.     Lond,  1855. 

Augustiue  did  not  stop  with  this  doctrine  of  sin  and  grace. 
He  pursued  his  anthropology  and  soteriology  to  their  source 
in  theology.  His  personal  experience  of  the  wonderful  and 
undeserved  grace  of  God,  various  passages  of  the  Scriptures, 
especially  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  the  logical  connec- 
tion of  thought,  led  him  to  the  doctrine  of  the  unconditional 
and  eternal  purpose  of  the  omniscient  and  omnipotent  God. 
In  this  he  found  the  programme  of  the  history  of  the  fall  and 
redemption  of  the  human  race.  He  ventured  boldly,  but 
reverentially,  upon  the  brink  of  that  abyss  of  speculation, 
where  all  human  knowledge  is  lost  in  mystery  and  in  adora- 
tion. 

Predestination,  in  general,  is  a  necessary  attribute  of  the 
divine  will,  as  foreknowledge  is  an  attribute  of  the  divine 
intelligence ;  though,  strictly  speaking,  we  cannot  predicate 
of  God  either  a  before  or  an  after,  and  with  him  all  is  eternal 
present.  It  is  absolutely  inconceivable  that  God  created  the 
world  or  man  blindly,  without  a  fixed  plan,  or  that  this  plan 
can  be  disturbed  or  hindered  in  any  way  by  his  creatures. 
Besides,  there  prevails  everywhere,  even  in  the  natural  life  of 
man,  in  the  distribution  of  mental  gifts  and  earthly  blessings, 
and  yet  much  more  in  the  realm  of  grace,  a  higher  guidance, 
which  is  wholly  independent  of  our  will  or  act.  Who  is  not 
obliged,  in  his  birth  in  this  or  that  place,  at  this  or  that  time. 


852  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D,    311-590. 

under  tliese  or  those  circumstances,  in  all  the  epochs  of  his 
existence,  in  all  his  opportunities  of  education,  and  above  all 
in  his  regeneration  and  sanctification,  to  recognize  and  adore 
the  providence  and  the  free  grace  of  God  ?  The  further  we 
are  advanced  in  the  Christian  life,  the  less  are  we  inclined  to 
attribute  any  merit  to  ourselves,  and  the  more  to  thank  God 
for  all.  The  believer  not  only  looks  forward  into  eternal  life, 
but  also  backward  into  the  ante-mundane  eternity,  and  finds 
in  the  eternal  purpose  of  divine  love  the  beginning  and  the 
firm  anchorage  of  his  salvation.* 

So  far  we  may  say  every  reflecting  Christian  must  believe 
in  some  sort  of  election  by  free  grace ;  and,  in  fact,  the  Holy 
Scriptures  are  full  of  it.  But  up  to  the  time  of  Augustine  the 
doctrine  had  never  been  an  object  of  any  very  profound  in- 
quiry, and  had  therefore  never  been  accurately  defined,  but 
only  very  superficially  and  casually  touched.  The  Greek 
fathers,  and  Tertullian,  Ambrose,  Jerome,  and  Pelagius,  had 
only  taught  a  conditional  predestination,  which  they  made 
dependent  on  the  foreknowledge  of  the  free  acts  of  men.  In 
this,  as  in  his  views  of  sin  and  grace,  Augustine  went  far 
beyond  the  earlier  divines,  taught  an  miconditional  election 
of  grace,  and  restricted  the  purpose  of  redemption  to  a  definite 
circle  of  the  elect,  who  constitute  the  minority  of  the  race.'' 

'  Rom.  viii.  29 ;  Eph.  i.  4.  /^ 

-  Comp.  the  opinions  of  the  pre-Augustinian  fathers  respecting  grace,  predesti- 
nation, and  the  extent  of  redemption,  as  given  in  detail  in  Wiggers,  i.  p.  440  ff. 
He  says,  p.  448 :  "  In  reference  to  predestination,  the  fathers  before  Augustine 
■were  entirely  at  variance  with  him,  and  in  agreement  with  Pelagius.  They,  like 
Pelagius,  founded  predestination  upon  prescience,  upon  the  fore-knowledge  of  God, 
as  to  who  would  make  themselves  worthy  or  unworthy  of  salvation.  They  assume, 
therefore,  not  the  unconditional  predestination  of  Augustine,  but  the  conditional 
predestination  of  the  Pelagians.  The  Massilians  had,  therefore,  a  full  right  to 
affirm  (Aug.  Ep.  225),  that  Augustine's  doctrine  of  predestination  was  opposed  to 
the  opinions  of  the  fathers  and  the  sense  of  the  church  (ecclesiastico  sensui),  and 
that  no  ecclesiastical  author  had  ever  yet  explained  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  as 
Augustine  did,  or  in  such  a  way  as  to  derive  from  it  a  grace  that  had  no  respect  to 
the  merits  of  the  elect.  And  it  was  only  by  a  doubtful  inference  (De  dono  pers.  19) 
that  Augustine  endeavored  to  prove  that  Cyprian,  Ambrose,  and  Gregory  Nazian- 
zen  had  known  and  received  his  view  of  predestination,  by  appealing  to  the  agree- 
ment between  this  doctrine  and  their  theory  of  grace."  Pelagius  says  of  predestina- 
tion in  his  Commentary  on  Rom.  viii.  29  and  ix.  30 :  "  Quos  prsevidit  conformes  esse 


s .. 


V  ^  '-^  .     w-..iu4 ' 


^  9. 


\  ^- 


^ 

•  »•«.    -    ■^. .      >■ 

v*V- 

•■  ■•      i.    '\l,-..\ 

.>-   <■> 

,     -V    \    «T>v 

'- 

*>*.>. 

.    >    V,v^ 

,:  *  :*> 

..  c*^  \ 

.-. 

v.>%,,.  ^-^ 


§   158.      THE   DOCTRENE   OF   PREDESTINATION.  853 

In  Augustine's  system  the  doctrine  of  predestination  is 
not,  as  in  Calvin's,  the  starting-point,  but  the  consumma- 
tion. It  is  a  deduction  from  his  views  of  sin  and  grace. 
It  is  therefore  more  practical  than  speculative.  It  is  held  in 
check  by  his  sacramental  views.  If  we  may  anticipate  a  much 
later  terminology,  it  moves  within  the  limits  of  infralapsa- 
riauism,  but  philosophically  is  less  consistent  than  supralapsa- 
rianism.  While  the  iofralapsarian  theory,  starting  with  the 
consciousness  of  sin,  excludes  the  fall — the  most  momentous 
event,  except  redemption,  in  the  history  of  the  world — from 
the  divine  pm^pose,  and  places  it  under  the  category  of  divine 
permission,  making  it  dependent  on  the  free  will  of  the  first 
man ;  the  supralapsarian  theory,  starting  with  the  conception 
of  the  absolute  sovereignty  of  God,  includes  the  fall  of  Adam 
in  the  eternal  and  unchangeable  plan  of  God,  though,  of  course, 
not  as  an  end,  or  for  its  own  sake  (which  would  be  blasphemy), 
but  as  a  temporary  means  to  an  opposite  end,  or  as  the  nega- 
tive condition  of  a  revelation  of  the  divine  justice  in  the  repro- 
bate, and  of  the  divine  grace  in  the  elect.  Augustine,  there- 
fore, strictly  speaking,  knows  nothing  of  a  double  decree  oi 
election  and  reprobation,  but  recognizes  simply  a  decree  of 
election  to  salvation ;  though  logical  instinct  does  sometimes 
carry  him  to  the  verge  of  supralapsarianism.  In  both  systems, 
however,  the  decree  is  eternal,  unconditioned,  and  immutable ; 
the  difference  is  in  the  subject,  which,  according  to  one  system, 
is  man  fallen,  according  to  the  other,  man  as  such.  It  was  a 
noble  inconsistency  which  kept  Augustine  from  the  more  strin- 
gent and  speculative  system  of  supralapsarianism;  his  deep 
moral  convictions  revolted  against  making  any  allowance  for 
sin  by  tracing  its  origin  to  the  divine  will ;  and  by  his  peculiar 
view  of  the  inseparable  connection  between  Adam  and  the 
race,  he  could  make  every  man  as  it  were  individually  respon- 
sible for  the  fall  of  Adam.  But  the  Pelagians,  ^vho  denied 
this  connection,  charged  him  with  teaching  a  kind  of  fatalism. 

The  first  sin,  according  to  Augustine's  theory,  was  an  act 
of  freedom,  which  could  and  should  have  been  avoided.     But 

in  vita,  voluit  ut  fierent  conformes  in  gloria.  .  .  .  Quos  praescivit  credituros,  li03 
vocavit,  vocatio  autem  volentes  colligit,  non  invitos." 


S54  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D,    311-590. 

once  committed,  it  subjected  the  whole  race,  which  was  germ- 
inallj  in  the  loins  of  Adam,  to  the  punitive  justice  of  God. 
All  men  are  only  a  mass  of  perdition,'  and  deserve,  both  for 
their  innate  and  their  actual  sin,  temporal  and  eternal  death. 
God  is  but  just,  if  He  leave  a  great  portion,  nay  (if  all  heathen 
and  unbaptized  children  are  lost),  the  greatest  portion,  of 
mankind  to  their  deserved  fate.  But  He  has  resolved  from 
eternity  to  reveal  in  some  His  grace,  by  rescuing  them  from 
the  mass  of  perdition,  and  without  tlieir  merit  saving 
them. 

This  is  the  election  of  grace,  or  predestination.  It  is  re- 
lated to  grace  itself,  as  cause  to  effect,  as  preparation  to  execu- 
tion.'^ It  is  the  ultimate,  unfathomable  ground  of  salvation. 
It  is  distinguished  from  foreknowledge,  as  will  from  intel- 
ligence; it  always  implies  intelligence,  but  is  not  always  im- 
plied in  it.^  God  determines  and  knows  beforehand  what  He 
will  do ;  the  fall  of  man,  and  the  individual  sins  of  men,  He 
knows  perfectly  even  from  eternity,  but  He  does  not  determine 
or  will  them.  He  only  permits  them.  There  is  thus  a  point, 
where  prescience  is  independent  of  predestination,  and  where 
human  freedom,  as  it  were,  is  interposed.  (Here  lies  the  phil- 
osophical weakness,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the  ethical  strength 
of  the  infralapsarian  system,  as  compared  with  the  supralap- 
sarian).  The  predetermination  has  reference  only  to  good,  not 
to  evil.  It  is  equivalent  to  election,  while  predestination,  in 
the  supralapsarian  scheme,  includes  the  decretum  electlonis 
and  the  decretum  reprdbationis.     Augustine,  it  is  true,  speaks 

'  Massa  pcrditionig,  a  favorite  expression  of  Augustine. 

'^  De  praedest.  sanct.  c.  10  (or  §  19,  torn.  x.  f.  803):  "Inter  gratiam  et  prasdesti- 
nationem  hoc  tantum  interest,  quod  prsedestinatio  est  gratise  prajparatio,  gratia  vero 
jam  ipsa  donatio.  Quod  itaque  ait  apostolus :  Non  ex  operibus  ne  forte  quis  extolla- 
iiir,  ipsius  enim  sumus  Jigmentum,  creati  in  Christo  Jesu  in  operibus  bonis  (Epli.  ii. 
9),  gratia  est ;  quod  autem  sequitur :  Qucs  prceparavit  Deus,  ut  in  illis  ambulemns, 
prasdestinatio  est,  quae  sine  prjescientia  non  potest  esse."  Further  on '  in  the  same 
chapter :  "  Gratia  est  ipsius  pra3destinationis  effectus." 

'  De  prffid.  sanctorum,  cap.  10:  "  Prasdestinatio  .  .  .  sine  prsescientia  non  potest 
esse ;  potest  autem  esse  sine  prffidestinatioue  prtescientia.  Pra;destinatione  quippe 
Deus  ea  prjescivit,  quaj  fuerat  ipse  facturus  .  .  .  praBScire  autem  potens  est  etiam 
quae  ipse  non  fiicit,  sicut  quajcumque  peceata."  Comp.  De  dono  perse verantiiB,  c. 
IS  (f.  847  sq.).  1 


§    158,       THE   DOCTRINE   OE   PEEDESTINATIOX.  855 

also  in  some  places  of  a  predestination  to  perdition  (in  conse- 
quence of  sin),  but  never  of  a  predestination  to  sin.^  The  elec- 
tion of  grace  is  conditioned  by  no  foreseen  merit,  but  is  abso- 
lutely free.  God  does  not  predestinate  His  cliildren  on  account 
of  their  faith,  for  their  faith  is  itself  a  gift  of  grace ;  but  He 
predestinates  them  to  faith  and  to  holiness.^ 

Thus  also  the  imputation  of  teaching  that  a  man  may  be 
elect,  and  yet  live  a  godless  life,  is  precluded.^  Sanctification 
is  the  infallible  efiect  of  election.  Those  ^vho  are  thus  pre- 
destinated as  vessels  of  mercy,  may  fall  for  a  while,  like  David 
and  Peter,  but  cannot  finally  fall  from  grace.  They  must  at 
last  be  saved  by  the  successive  steps  of  vocation,  justification, 
and  glorification,  as  certainly  as  God  is  almighty  and  His  pro- 
mises Tea  and  Amen;*  while  the  vessels  of  wrath  are  lost 
through  their  own  fault.  To  election  necessarily  belongs  the 
gift  of  perseverance,  the  donum  perseverantice^  which  is  attest- 
ed by  a  happy  death.  Those  who  fall  away,  even  though  they 
have  been  baptized  and  regenei'ated,  show  thereby,  that  they 

'  De  anima  et  ejus  oiigine  (written  a.  d.  419),  1.  iv.  c.  11  (or  §  16,  torn.  x.  f. 
395):  "Ex  imo  homine  omnes  homines  ire  in  condemnationem  qui  nascuntur  ex 
Adam,  nisi  ita  renascantur  in  Christo  .  .  .  quos  prcedestinavii  ad  cefeimam  vitam 
misericordissimus  gratiae  largitor :  qui  est  et  illis  quos  prcedestinavii  ad  ceternam  mor- 
tem, jnstissinms  supplicii  retributor."  Comp.  Tract,  in  Joann.  xlviii.  4:  "ad  sem- 
piternum  interitum  pradestinatos,"  and  similar  passages. 

^  De  prffid.  sanct.  c.  18  (§  37,  x.  f.  815):  "Elegit  ergo  nos  Deus  in  Christo  ante 
mundi  constitutionem,  praadestinans  nos  in  adoptionem  filiorum :  non  quia  per  nos 
sancti  et  immaculati  futuri  eramus,  sed  elegit  prmdestinavitque  ut  essemus."  Augus- 
tine then  goes  on  to  attack  the  Pelagian  and  Semi-Pelagian  theory  of  a  predestina- 
tion conditioned  upon  the  foreseen  holiness  of  the  creature.  Cap.  19  (§  38) :  "Xec 
qtcia  credidimus,  sed  ut  credamus,  vocamur." 

^  This  imputation  of  some  monks  of  Adrumetum  in  Tunis  is  met  by  Augustine 
particularly  in  his  treatise  De  correptione  et  gratia  (a.  d.  427),  in  which  he  shows 
that  as  gratia  and  the  liberum  arbitrium,  so  also  correptio  and  gratia,  admonition 
and  gi'ace,  are  by  no  means  mutually  exclusive,  but  rather  mutually  condition  each 
other. 

*  De  corrept.  et  grat.  c.  7  (§  14):  "Nemo  eorum  [electorum]  perit,  quia  non 
fallitur  Deus.  Horum  s^  quisquam  perit,  vitio  humano  vincitur  Deus ;  sed  nemo 
eorum  perit,  quia  nulla  re  vincitur  Deus."  Ibid.  c.  9  (§  23,  f.  763) :  "  Quicunque 
ergo  in  Dei  providentissima  dispositione  prasciti,  prfedestinati,  vocati,  justiflcati, 
glorificati  sunt,  non  dico  etiam  nondum  renati,  sed  etiam  nondum  nati,  jam  filii  Dei 
sunt,  et  omnino  perire  non  possunt."  For  this  he  appeals  to  Eom.  viii.  31  ff. ; 
John  vi.  37,  39,  etc. 


856  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

never  belonged  to  the  number  of  the  elect.*  Hence  we  cannot 
certainly  know  in  this  life  who  are  of  the  elect,  and  we  must 
call  all  to  repentance  and  offer  to  all  salvation,  though  the 
vocation  of  grace  onlj  proves  effectual  to  some. 

Augustine,  as  already  remarked,  deduced  this  doctrine  from 
his  view  of  sin.  If  all  men  are  by  nature  utterly  incompetent 
to  good,  if  it  is  grace  that  works  in  us  to  will  and  to  do  good, 
if  faith  itself  is  an  undeserved  gift  of  grace:  the  ultimate 
ground  of  salvation  can  then  be  found  only  in  the  inscrutable 
counsel  of  God.  He  appealed  to  the  wonderful  leadings  in 
the  lives  of  individuals  and  of  nations,  some  being  called  to  the 
gosj^el  and  to  baptism,  while  others  die  in  darkness.  Why 
precisely  this  or  that  one  attains  to  faith  and  others  do  not,  is, 
indeed,  a  mystery.  "We  cannot,  says  he,  in  this  life  explain 
the  leadings  of  Providence ;  if  we  only  believe  that  God  is 
righteous,  we  shall  hereafter  attain  to  perfect  knowledge. 

He  could  cite  many  Scripture  texts,  especially  the  ninth 
chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  for  his  doctrine.  But 
other  texts,  which  teach  the  universal  vocation  to  salvation, 
and  make  man  responsible  for  his  reception  or  rejection  of  the 
gospel,  he  could  only  explain  by  forced  inteq^retations.  Thus, 
for  instance,  he  understands  in  1  Tim.  ii.  4  by  the  all  men, 
whom  God  will  have  to  be  saved,  all  manner  of  men,  rich 
and  poor,  learned  and  unlearned,  or  he  wrests  the  sense  into : 
All  who  are  saved,  are  saved  only  by  the  will  of  God.''  When 
he  finds  no  other  way  of  meeting  objections,  he  appeals  to  the 
inscrutable  wisdom  of  God. 

Augustine's  doctrine  of  predestination  was  the  immediate 
occasion  of  a  theological  controversy  which  lasted  almost  a 
hundred  years,  developed  almost  every  argument  for  and 
against  the  doctrine,  and  called  forth  a  system  holding  middle 
ground,  to  which  we  now  turn. 

'  De  corrept.  et  gratia,  c.  9  (g  23,  x.  f.  763) :  "Ab  illo  [Deo]  datur  etiam  per- 
severantia  in  bono  usque  in  finem ;  neque  enim  datur  niSi  eis  qui  non  peribimt : 
quoniam  qui  non  perseverant  pcribunt."  Ibid.  c.  11  (§36,  f.  "770):  "Qui  autem 
cadunt  et  pereunt,  in  prffidestinatorum  numero  non  fuerunt." 

^  Opus  imperf.  iv.  124;  De  corrept.  et  gratia,  i.  28;  De  prsed.  sanct.  8;  Enchir. 
c.  108 ;  Epist.  217,  0.  6.     Comp.  Wiggers,  1.  c.  pp.  365  and  463  ffi 


§   159.      SEMI-PELAGIANISM.  857 

§  159.     Semi-Pelagianism. 

Oomp.  the  Works  at  §  14G. 
SOUECES. 

I.  JoH.  Oassianus  (t  432) :  CoUationes  Patrum  xxiv,  especially  the  xiii. 
In  the  Opera  omnia,  cum  commentariis  D.  Alardi  Gazwi  (Gazet), 
Atrebati  (Atrecht  or  Arras  in  France),  1628  and  1733;  reprinted, 
■with  additions,  in  Migne's  Patrologia,  torn,  xlix.  and  1.  (tom.  i.  pp. 
478-1328),  and  also  published  several  times  separately.  Vincentitts 
LiEiNEXsis  (t  450),  Faustus  Rhegiensis  (t  490-500),  and  other  Semi- 
Pelagian  writers,  see  Gallandi,  Biblioth.  tom.  x.,  and  Migne,  Patrol, 
tom.  1.  and  liii. 

n.  AuGrsTDfus :  De  gratia  et  libero  arbitrio ;  De  correptione  et  gratia ; 
De  prajdestinatione  sanctorum;  De  dono  perseverantise  (all  in  the 
10th  vol,  of  the  Benedict,  ed.).  Prosper  Aquitanus  (a  disciple  and 
admirer  of  Augustine,  1 460) :  Epistola  ad  Augustiuum  de  reliquiis 
PelagiaofG  hajreseos  in  Gallia  (Aug.  Ep.  225,  and  in  Opera  Aug.  tom.  x. 
780),  and  De  gratia  et  libero  arbitrio  (conti-a  Collatorem).  Hilarius  : 
Ad  Augustinum  de  eodem  argumento  (Ep.  226  among  the  Epp.  Aug., 
and  in  tom.  x.  783).  Also  the  Augustinian  ■writmgs  of  Avitcs  of 
Yienne,  C^saeius  of  Aries,  Fui-gentitjs  of  Ruspe,  and  others.  (Comp. 
Gallandi,  Bibl.  tom.  xi. ;  Migne,  Patrol,  vol.  li.) 

The  Acta  of  the  Synod  of  Orange,  a.  d.  529,  in  Mansi,  tom.  viii. 
711  sqq. 

LITERATURE. 

Jao.  Siemond:  Historia  prredestinatiana.  Par.  1648.  JonAx:^'  Geffkek: 
Historia  Semipelagianismi  antiquissima  (more  properly  antiquissimi). 
Gott.  1826  (only  goes  to  the  year  434).  G.  Fr.  "Wiggees  :  Versuch 
einer  pragmatischen  Darstellung  des  Semipelagianismus  in  seinem 
Kampfe  gegen  den  Augustinismus  bis  zur  zweiten  Synode  zu  Orange. 
Hamburg,  1833  (the  second  part  of  his  already  cited  work  upon 
Augiistinianism  and  Pelagianism).  A  very  thorough  work,  but  un- 
fortunately without  index.  Comp.  also  Walch,  Schrockh,  and  the 
appropriate  portions  of  the  later  works  upon  the  history  of  the  cliurch 
and  of  doctrines. 

Semi-Pelagianism  is  a  somewhat  vague  and  indefinite 
attempt  at  reconciliation,  hovering  midway  between  tlie 
sharply  marked  systems  of  Pelagius  and  Augustine,  taking  off 
the  edge  of  each,  and  inclining  now  to  the  one,  now  to  the 


858  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

other.  The  name  was  introduced  during  the  scholastic  age, 
but  the  system  of  doctrine,  in  all  essential  points,  was  formed 
in  Southern  France  in  the  fifth  century,  during  the  latter 
years  of  Augustine's  life  and  soon  after  his  death.  It  pro- 
ceeded from  the  combined  influence  of  the  pre-Augustinian 
synergism  and  monastic  legalism.  Its  leading  idea  is,  that 
divine  grace  and  the  human  will  jointly  accomplish  the  work 
of  conversion  and  sanctification,  and  that  ordinarily  man  must 
take  the  first  step.  It  rejects  the  Pelagian  doctrine  of  the 
moral  soundness  of  man,  but  rejects  also  the  Augustinian  doc- 
trine of  the  entire  corruption  and  bondage  of  the  natural  man, 
and  substitutes  the  idea  of  a  diseased  or  crippled  state  of  the 
voluntary  power.  It  disowns  the  Pelagian  conception  of  grace 
as  a  mere  external  auxiliary ;  but  also,  quite  as  decidedly,  the 
Augustinian  doctrines  of  the  sovereignty,  irresistibleness,  and 
limitation  of  grace ;  and  affirms  the  necessity  and  the  internal 
operation  of  grace  with  and  through  human  agency,  a  general 
atonement  through  Christ,  and  a  predestination  to  salvation 
conditioned  by  the  foreknowledge  of  faith.  The  union  of  the 
Pelagian  and  Augustinian  elements  thus  attempted  is  not, 
however,  an  inward  organic  coalescence,  but  rather  a  mechan- 
ical and  arbitrary  combination,  which  really  satisfies  neither 
the  one  interest  nor  the  other,  but  commonly  leans  to  the 
Pelagian  side.^ 

For  this  reason  it  admirably  suited  the  legalistic  and  ascetic 
piety  of  the  middle  age,  and  indeed  always  remained  within 

1  Wiggers  (ii.  pp.  859-364)  gives  a  comparative  view  of  the  three  systems  in 
parallel  columns.  Comp.  also  the  criticism  of  Baur,  Die  christliche  Kirche  vom 
vierten  bis  zum  sechsten  Jahrhundert,  p.  181  flf.  The  latter,  with  his  wonted  sharp- 
ness of  criticism,  judges  very  unfavorably  of  Semi-Pelagianism  as  a  whole.  "  This 
halving  and  neutralizing,"  he  says,  p.  199  ff.,  "this  attempt  at  equal  distribution  of 
the  two  complementary  elements,  not  only  setting  them  apart,  but  also  balancing 
them  with  one  another,  so  that  sometimes  the  one,  sometunes  the  other,  is  predSmi- 
nant,  and  thus  within  this  whole  sphere  everything  is  casual  and  arbitrary,  varying 
and  indefinite  according  to  the  diversity  of  circumstances  and  individuals,  this  is  char- 
acteristic of  Scmi-Pelagianism  throughout.  If  the  two  opposing  theories  cannot  be 
inwardly  reconciled,  at  least  they  must  be  combined  in  such  a  way  as  that  a  specific 
clement  must  be  taken  from  each ;  the  Pelagian  freedom  and  the  Augustinian  grace 
must  be  advanced  to  equal  rank.  But  this  method  only  gains  an  external  juxtaposi- 
tion of  the  two." 


§   159.      SEMI-PELAGIAOTSM.  859 

the  pale  of  the  Catholic  chiirch,  and  never  produced  a  separate 
sect. 

We  glance  now  at  the  main  features  of  the  origin  and 
progress  of  this  school. 

The  Pelagian  system  had  been  vanquished  by  Augustine, 
and  rejected  and  condemned  as  heresy  by  the  church.  This 
result,  however,  did  not  in  itself  necessarily  imply  the  com- 
plete approval  of  the  Augustinian  system.  Many,  even  oppo- 
nents of  Pelagius,  recoiled  from  a  position  so  wide  of  the  older 
fathers  as  Augustine's  doctrines  of  the  bondage  of  man  and  the 
absolute  election  of  grace,  and  preferred  a  middle  ground. 

Fii'st  the  monks  of  the  convent  of  Adrumetum  in  North 
Africa  differed  among  themselves  over  the  doctrine  of  predes- 
tination ;  some  perverting  it  to  carnal  security,  others  plung- 
ing from  it  into  anguish  and  desperation,  and  yet  others 
feeling  compelled  to  lay  more  stress  than  Augustine  upon 
human  freedom  and  responsibility.  Augustine  endeavored  to 
allay  the  scniples  of  these  monks  by  his  two  treatises,  De 
gratia  et  lihero  arbitrio^  and  De  correptioiie  et  gratia.  The 
abbot  Yalentinus  auswered  these  in  the  name  of  tlie  monks  in 
a  reverent  and  submissive  tone.' 

But  simultaneously  a  more  dangerous  opposition  to  the 
doch'ine  of  predestination  arose  in  Southern  Gaul,  in  the  form 
of  a  regular  theological  school  within  the  Catholic  church. 
The  members  of  this  school  were  first  called  "  remnants  of  the 
Pelagians,"  ^  but  commonly  Massilians,  from  Massilia  (Mar- 
seilles), their  chief  centre,  and  afterwards  Semi-Pelagiaxs. 
Augustine  received  an  account  of  this  from  two  learned  and 
pious  lay  friends.  Prosper,  and  Hilarius,^  who  begged  that  he 
himself  would  take  the  pen  against  it.  This  was  the  occasion 
of  his  two  works,  De ]>r(Edcstinatione  sanctorum.^  and  De  dono 

'  His  answer  is  found  in  the  Epistles  of  Augustine,  Ep.  216,  and  in  Opera,  torn. 
X.  f.  746  (ed.  Bened.). 

'  "  Reliqmae  Pelagianorum."  So  Prosper  calls  tliem  in  his  letter  to  Augustine^ 
He  saw  in  them  disguised,  and  therefore  only  so  much  the  more  dangerous,  Pela- 
gians. 

'  Not  to  be  confounded  with  Hilarlus,  bishop  of  Aries,  in  distinction  from  whom 
he  is  called  Hilarius  Prosperi.  Hilary  calls  himself  a  layman  (Aug.  Ep.  226,  §  9). 
Comp.  the  Benedictines  in  torn.  x.  f.  785;  Wiggers,  ii.  137). 


860  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

perseverenticB,  witli  whicli  he  worthily  closed  his  labors  as  an 
author.  He  deals  with  these  disputants  more  gently  than 
with  the  Pelagians,  and  addresses  them  as  brethren.  After 
his  death  (430)  the  discussion  was  continued  principally  in 
Gaul ;  for  then  North  Africa  was  disquieted  by  the  victorious 
invasion  of  the  Vandals,  which  for  several  decades  shut  it  out 
from  the  circle  of  theological  and  ecclesiastical  activity. 

At  the  head  of  the  Semi-Pelagian  party  stood  John  Cas- 
siAN,  the  founder  and  abbot  of  the  monastery  at  Massilia,  a 
man  of  thorough  cultivation,  rich  experience,  and  unquestioned 
orthodoxy.'  He  was  a  grateful  disciple  of  Chrysostom,  who 
ordained  him  deacon,  and  apparently  also  presbyter.  His 
Greek  training  and  his  predilection  for  monasticism  were  a 
favorable  soil  for  his  Semi-Pelagian  theory.  He  labored  awhile 
in  Rome  with  Pelagius,  and  afterwards  in  Southern  France,  in 
the  cause  of  monastic  piety,  which  he  efficiently  promoted  by 
exhortation  and  example.  Monasticism  sought  in  cloistered 
retreats  a  protection  against  the  allurements  of  sin,  the  desolat- 
ing iucm'sions  of  the  barbarians,  and  the  wretchedness  of  an 
ao;e  of  tumult  and  confusion.  But  the  enthusiasm  for  the 
monastic  life  tended  strongly  to  over-value  external  acts  and 
ascetic  discipline,  and  resisted  the  free  evangelical  bent  of  the 
Augustinian  theology.  Cassian  wrote  twelve  books  De 
ccBnoMorum  institutis,  m  which  he  first  describes  the  outward 
life  of  the  monks,  and  then  their  inward  conflicts  and  victories 
over  the  eight  capital  vices :  intemperance,  unchastity,  avarice, 
auger,  sadness,  dulness,  ambition,  and  pride.  More  important 
are  his  fourteen  Collationes  Patrimi,  conversations  which  Cas- 
sian and  his  friend  Germanus  had  had  with  the  most  expe- 

'  Wiggers  treats  thoroughly  and  at  length  of  him,  in  the  above  cited  mono- 
graph, vol.  ii.  pp.  Y-136.  He  has  been  mistakenly  supposed  a  Scythian.  His  name 
and  his  fluent  Latinity  indicate  an  occidental  origin.  Yet  he  was  in  part  educated 
at  Bethlehem  and  in  Constantinople,  and  spent  seven  years  among  the  anchorites  in 
Egypt.  He  mentioned  John  Chrysostom  even  in  the  evening  of  his  life  with  grate- 
ful veneration.  (De  incam.  vii.  30  sq.)  "  "What  I  have  written,"  he  says,  "  John 
has  taught  me,  and  therefore  account  it  not  so  much  mine  as  his.  For  a  brook 
rises  from  a  spring,  and  what  is  ascribed  to  the  pupil,  must  be  reckoned  wholly  to 
the  honor  of  the  teacher."  On  the  life  and  writings  of  Cassian  compare  also 
ScHoNEMAXN,  Bibhothcca,  vol.  ii.  (reprinted  in  Migne's  ed.  vol.  i.). 


§  159.      SEMI-PELAGIANISM.  861 

rienced  ascetics  in  Egj-pt,  during  a  seven  years'  sojourn 
there. 

In  this  work,  especially  in  the  thirteenth  Colloquy/  he 
rejects  decidedly  the  errors  of  Pelagius,''  and  affirms  the  uni- 
versal sinfulness  of  men,  the  introduction  of  it  by  the  fall  of 
Adam,  and  the  necessity  of  divine  grace  to  every  individual 
act.  But,  with  evident  reference  to  Augustine,  though  with- 
out naming  him,  he  combats  the  doctrines  of  election  and  of 
the  irresistible  and  particular  operation  of  grace,  which  were 
in  conflict  with  the  chm'ch  ti'adition,  especially  with  the  Orien- 
tal theology,  and  with  his  own  earnest  ascetic  legalism. 

In  opposition  to  both  systems  he  taught  that  the  divine 
image  and  human  freedom  were  not  annihilated,  but  only 
weakened,  by  the  fall ;  in  other  words,  that  man  is  sick,  but 
not  dead,  that  he  cannot  indeed  help  himself,  but  that  he  can 
desire  the  help  of  a  physician,  and  either  accept  or  refuse  it 
when  offered,  and  that  he  must  co-operate  with  the  grace  of 
God  in  his  salvation.  The  question,  which  of  the  two  factors 
has  the  initiative,  he  answers,  altogether  empirically,  to  this 
effect :  that  sometimes,  and  indeed  usually,  the  human  will, 
as  in  the  cases  of  the  Prodigal  Son,  Zacchseus,  the  Penitent 
Thief,  and  Cornelius,  determines  itself  to  conversion ;  some- 
times grace  anticipates  it,  and,  as  with  Matthew  and  Paul, 
draws  the  resisting  will — yet,  even  in  this  case,  without  con- 
straint— to  God.'  Here,  therefore,  the  gratia  prmve'tiiens  is 
manifestly  overlooked. 

These  are  essentially  Semi-Pelagian  principles,  though 
capable    of    various    modifications  *and    applications.       The 

*  De  protectione  Del     In  Migne's  edition  of  Cass.  Opera,  vol.  i.  pp.  397-954. 

*  He  calls  the  Pelagian  doctrine  of  the  native  ability  of  man  '■'■profanam  opinio- 
nem"  (ColL  xiii.  16,  in  Migne's  ed.  torn.  i.  p.  942),  and  even  says:  "Pelagium  psene 
omnes  impietaie  [probably  here  equivalent  to  "  contempt  of  grace,"  as  Wiggers,  ii. 
20,  explains  it]  et  amentia  vicisse"  (De  incam.  Dom.  v.  2,  torn.  ii.  101). 

^  "  Xonnumquam,"  says  he,  De  institut.  coenob.  sii.  18  (Opera,  voL  ii.  p.  436,  ed. 
lligne),  "  etiam  inviti  trahimur  ad  salutem."  This  is,  however,  according  to  Cassian, 
a  rare  exception.  The  general  distinction  between  Semi-Pelagianism  and  the  Melanch- 
thonian  synergism  may  be  thus  defined,  that  the  former  ascribes  the  initiative  in  the 
work  of  conversion  to  the  human  will,  the  latter  to  divine  grace,  which  involves 
also  a  dififerent  estimate  of  the  importance  of  the  gratia  praeveniens  or  prseparans. 


862  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

church,  even  the  Eoman  chm-ch,  has  rightly  emphasized  the 
necessity  of  prevenient  grace,  but  has  not  impeached  Cassian, 
who  is  properly  the  father  of  the  Semi-Pelagian  theory.  Leo 
the  Great  even  commissioned  him  to  write  a  work  against 
!Nestorianism,^  in  which  he  found  an  excellent  opportunity  to 
establish  his  orthodoxy,  and  to  clear  himself  of  all  connection 
with  the  kindred  heresies  of  Pelagianism  and  ]tTestorianism, 
which  were  condemned  together  at  Ephesus  in  431.  He  died 
after  432,  at  an  advanced  age,  and  though  not  formally  canon- 
ized, is  honored  as  a  saint  by  some  dioceses.  His  works  are 
very  extensively  read  for  practical  edification. 

Against  the  thirteenth  Colloquy  of  Cassian,  Peospek  Aqui- 
TAinjs,  an  Augustinian  divine  and  poet,  who,  probably  on  ac- 
count of  the  desolations  of  the  Yandals,  had  left  his  native 
Aquitania  for  the  South  of  Gaul,  and  found  comfort  and  repose 
in  the  doctrines  of  election  amid  the  wars  of  his  age,  wrote 
a  book  upon  grace  and  ireedom,''  about  432,  in  which  he 
criticises  twelve  propositions  of  Cassian,  and  declares  them  all 
heretical,  except  the  first.  He  also  composed  a  long  poem  in 
defence  of  Augustine  and  his  system,"  and  refuted  the  "Gallic 
slanders  and  Yincentian  imputations,"  which  placed  the  doc- 
trine of  predestination  in  the  most  odious  light.* 

But  the  Semi-Pelagian  doctrine  was  the  more  popular,  and 
made  great  progress  in  France.     Its  principal  advocates  after 

'  De  incarnatione  Christi,  libri  vii.  in  Migne's  ed.  torn.  ii.  9-272. 

"^  Found  in  the  works  of  Prosper,  Paris,  IV 11  (torn.  li.  in  Migne's  Patrol.),  and 
also  in  the  Appendix  to  the  Opera  Augustini  (torn.  x.  171-198,  ed.  Bened.),  under 
the  title  Pro  Augustino,  liber  contra  Collatorem.     Comp.  Wiggers,  ii.  p.  138  fF. 

^  Carmen  de  ingratis.  He  charges  the  Semi-Pelagians  with  ingratitude  to 
Augustine  and  his  great  merits  to  the  cause  of  religion. 

*  These  Responsiones  Prosperi  Aquitani  ad  capitula  calumniantium  Gallorum 
and  Ad  capitula  objectionum  Vincentianorum  (of  Vincentius  Lirinensis)  are  also 
found  in  the  Appendix  to  the  10th  toI.  of  the  Benedictine  edition  of  the  Opera 
Augustini,  f.  198  sqq.  and  f.  207  sqq.  Among  the  objections  of  Vincentius  are, 
e.  g.,  the  following : 

8.  Quia  Deus  majorem  partem  generis  humani  ad  hoc  erect,  ut  illani  perdat  in 
asternum. 

4.  Quia  major  pars  generis  humani  ad  hoc  creetur  a  Deo,  ut  non  Dei,  sed  diaboli 
faciat  voluntatem. 

10.  Quia  adulteria  et  corruptelaj  Tirginum  sacrarum  ideo  contingant,  quia  illaa 
Deus  ad  hoc  prajdestinavit  ut  cadercnt. 


§  159.      SEMI-PELAGIANI8M.  863 

Cassian  are  the  following :  the  presbyter-monk  YmcENTros  of 
Leriuum,  author  of  the  Commonitorvmn^  in  which  he  developed 
the  true .  catholic  test  of  doctrine,  the  threefold  consensus,  in 
covert  antagonism  to  the  novel  doctrines  of  Augustinianism 
(about  434) ; '  Faustus,  bishop  of  Rhegium  (Riez),  who  at  the 
council  of  Aries  (475)  refuted  the  hyper- Augustinian  presbyter 
Lucidus,  and  was  commissioned  by  the  council  to  write  a  work 
upon  the  grace  of  God  and  human  freedom ;  "^  GENNAorus, 
presbyter  at  Marseilles  (died  after  495),  who  continued  the 
biographical  work  of  Jerome,  De  viris  ilUistribus,  down  to 
495,  and  attributed  Augustine's  doctrine  of  predestination  to 
his  itch  for  v\Titing ;  ^  ARNonros  the  younger ;  *  and  the  much 
discussed  anonymous  tract  Prcedestinatus  (about  460),  which, 
by  gross  exaggeration,  and  by  an  unwarranted  imputation  of 
logical  results  which  Augustine  had  expressly  forestalled, 
placed  the  doctrine  of  predestination  in  an  odious  light,  and 
then  refuted  it/ 

'  Comp.  above,  §  118;  also  Wiggers,  ii.  p.  208  ff.,  and  Baur,  1.  c.  p.  185  fif., 
who  likewise  impute  to  the  Commonitorium  a  Semi-Pelagian  tendency.  This  is 
beyond  doubt,  if  Viucentius  was  the  author  of  the  above-mentioned  Objectiones 
Vincentianse.  Perhaps  the  second  part  of  the  Commonitorium,  which,  except  the 
last  chapters,  has  been  lost,  was  specially  directed  against  the  Augustinian  doctrine 
of  predestination,  and  was  on  this  account  destroyed,  while  the  first  part  acquired 
almost  canonical  authority  in  the  Catholic  church. 

*  De  gratia  Dei  et  humanas  mentis  libero  arbitrio  (in  the  Biblioth.  maxima  Patrum, 
torn.  viii.).  This  work  is  regarded  as  the  ablest  defence  of  Semi-Pelagianism  written 
in  that  age.     Comp.  upon  it  Wiggers,  ii.  p.  224  ff. 

^  De  viris  illustr.  c.  38,  where  he  speaks  in  other  respects  eulogistically  of 
Augustine.  He  refers  to  the  passage  in  Prov.  x.  19:  "In  multiloquio  non  fugies 
peccatum."  Comp.  respecting  him  Wiggers,  ii.  350  ff.  and  Neander,  Dogmen- 
geschichte,  i.  p.  406.     His  works  are  found  in  Migne's  Patrol,  vol.  58. 

^  In  his  Commentarius  in  Psalmos,  written  about  460,  especially  upon  Ps. 
cxxvii. :  "  Nisi  Dominus  ffidificaverit  domum."  Some,  following  Sirmond,  consider 
him  as  the  author  of  the  next-mentioned  treatise  Prcedestmaius,  but  without  good 
ground.     Comp.  Wiggers,  ii.  p.  348  f. 

^  "  Prffidestinatus,  seu  Prtedestinatorum  ha^resis,  et  libri  S.  Augustino  temere 
adscript!  refatatio."  The  heeresis  Pradestinatorum  is  the  last  of  ninety  heresies, 
and  consists  in  the  assertion :  "  Dei  prredestinationc  peccata  committi."  This  work 
was  first  discovered  by  J.  Sirmond  and  published  at  Paris  in  1643  (also  in  Gallandi, 
Biblioth.  torn.  x.  p.  359  sqq.,  and  in  Migne's  Patrol,  torn.  liii.  p.  587  sqq.,  together 
with  Sirmond's  Historia  Prsedestinatiana).  It  occasioned  in  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury a  Hvely  controversy  between  the  Jesuits  and  the  Jansenists,  as  to  whether 
there  had  existed  a  distinct  sect  of  Prsdestiuarians.     The  author,  however,  merely 


864:  THIKD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

The  author  of  the  Prcedestinatus  says,  that  a  treatise  had 
fallen  into  his  hands,  which  fraudulently  bore  upon  its  face 
the  name  of  the  orthodox  teacher  Augustine,  in  order  to 
smuggle  in,  under  a  Catholic  name,  a  blasphemous  dogma,  per- 
nicious to  the  faith.  On  this  account  he  had  undertaken  to 
transcribe  and  to  refute  this  work.  The  treatise  itself  consists 
of  three  books;  the  .first,  following  Augustine's  book,  De 
hmresibus,  gives  a  description  of  ninety  heresies  from  Simon 
Magus  down  to  the  time  of  the  author,  and  brings  up,  as  the 
last  of  them,  the  doctrine  of  a  double  predestination,  as  a  doc- 
trine which  makes  God  the  author  of  evil,  and  renders  all  the 
moral  endeavors  of  men  fruitless ;  *  the  second  book  is  the 
pseudo-Augustinian  treatise  upon  this  ninetieth  heresy,  but  is 
apparently  merely  a  Serai-Pelagian  caricature  by  the  same 
author;"  the  third  book  contains  the  refutation  of  the  thus 
travestied  pseudo-Augustinian  doctrine  of  predestination,  em- 
ploying the  usual  Semi-Pelagian  arguments- 

A  counterpart  to  this  treatise  is  found  in  the  also  anony- 
mous work,  De  vocatione  om^iium  gentium^  which  endeavors 
to  commend  Augustinianism  by  mitigation,  in  the  same  degree 
that  the  PrcBclestinatus  endeavors  to  stultify  it  by  exaggeration.' 
It  has  been  ascribed  to  pope  Leo  I.  (f  461),  of  whom  it  would 
not  be  unworthy ;  but  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  the  work  of 
so  distinguished  a  man  could  have  remained  anonymous.    The 

feigned  such  a  sect  to  exist,  in  order  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  attacking  Augus- 
tine's authority.  See  details  in  Wiggers,  ii.  p.  329  ff. ;  Neander,  Dogmengeschichte, 
i.  399  fif. ;  and  Baur,  p.  190  ff.  The  latter  says:  "The  treatise  [more  accurately 
the  second  book  of  it ;  the  whole  consists  of  three  books]  is  ascribed  to  Augustine, 
but  as  the  ascription  is  immediately  after  declared  false,  both  assertions  are  evidently 
made  with  the  purpose  of  condemning  Augustine's  doctrine  with  its  consequences 
(only  not  directly  in  his  name),  as  one  morally  most  worthy  of  reprobation." 
Neander  ascribes  only  the  first  and  the  third  book,  Baur  also  the  second  book,  to 
a  Semi-Pelagian. 

'  The  first  book  has  also  been  reprinted  in  the  Corpus  haereseolog.  ed.  F.  Oehler, 
torn.  i.  Berol.  1856,  pp.  233-268. 

^  Just  as  the  Capitula  Gallorum  and  the  Objectiones  Vincentianae  exaggerate 
Augustinianism,  in  order  the  more  easily  to  refute  it. 

'  It  is  found  among  the  works  of  Leo  I.  and  also  of  Prosper  Aquitanus,  but 
deviates  from  the  views  of  the  latter.  Comp.  Quesnel's  leaVned  Disucrtaliones  de 
audorc  Ubri  de  vocatione  gentium^  in  the  second  part  of  his  edition  of  Leo's  works, 
and  also  Wiggers,  ii.  p.  218  ff. 


§   160.      VICTOET   OF   SEMI-AUGUSTINIANISM.  865 

author  avoids  even  the  term.  prcedestzTiatio,  and  teaches  express- 
ly, that  Christ  died  for  all  men  and  would  have  all  to  be  saved ; 
thus  rejecting  the  Augustinian  particularism.  But,  on  the 
other  hand,  he  also  rejects  the  Semi-Pelagian  principles,  and 
asserts  the  utter  inability  of  the  natural  man  to  do  good.  He 
unhesitatingly  sets  grace  above  the  human  will,  and  represents 
the  whole  life  of  faith,  from  beginning  to  end,  as  a  work  of 
unmerited  grace.  He  develops  the  three  thoughts,  that  God 
desires  the  salvation  of  all  men ;  that  no  one  is  saved  by  his 
own  merits,  but  by  grace ;  and  that  the  human  understanding 
cannot  fathom  the  depths  of  divine  wisdom.  We  must  trust 
in  the  righteousness  of  God.  Every  one  of  the  damned  suffers 
only  the  righteous  punishment  of  his  sins ;  while  no  saint  can 
boast  himself  in  his  merits,  since  it  is  only  of  pure  grace  that 
he  is  saved.  But  how  is  it  with  the  great  multitude  of  infants 
that  die  every  year  without  baptism,  and  without  opportunity- 
of  coming  to  the  knowledge  of  salvation  ?  The  author  feels 
this  difficulty,  without,  however,  being  able  to  solve  it.  He 
calls  to  his  help  the  representative  character  of  parents,  and 
dilutes  the  Augustinian  doctrine  of  original  sin  to  the  negative 
conception  of  a  mere  defect  of  good,  v/hich,  of  course,  also 
reduces  the  idea  of  hereditary  guilt  and  the  damnation  of  un- 
baptized  children.  He  distinguishes  between  a  general  grace 
which  comes  to  man  through  the  external  revelation  in  nature, 
law,  and  gospel,  and  a  sj>ecial  grace,  which  effects  conversion 
and  regeneration  by  an  inward  impartation  of  saving  power, 
and  which  is  only  bestowed  on  those  that  are  saved. 

Semi-Pelagianism  prevailed  in  Gaul  for  several  decades. 
Under  the  lead  of  Faustus  of  Ehegium  it  gained  the  victory 
in  two  synods,  at  Aries  in  472  and  at  Lyons  in  475,  where 
Augustine's  doctrine  of  predestination  was  condemned,  though 
without  mention  of  his  name. 

§  160.     Victory  of  Semi-Augustinianism.    Council  of  Orange^ 

A.  D.  529. 

But  these  synods  were  only  provincial,  and  were  the  cause 
of  a  schism.     In  ISTorth  Africa  and  in  Rome  the  Augustinian 

TOL.  II. — 55 


866  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

system  of  doctrine,  tbongli  in  a  somewhat  softened  form,  at- 
tained the  ascendency.  In  the  decree  issued  by  pope  Gelasius 
in  496  de  lihris  Tecipiendis  et  non  recipiendls  (the  beginning 
of  an  Index  librorum  prohibitorum),  the  writings  of  Augustine 
and  Prosper  Aquitamis  are  placed  among  books  ecclesiastically 
sanctioned,  those  of  Cassian  and  Faustus  of  Khegium  among 
the  apocryphal  or  forbidden.  Even  in  Gaul  it  found  in  the 
beginning  of  the  sixth  century  very  capable  and  distinguished 
advocates,  especially  in  Avitus,  archbishop  of  Yienne  (490- 
523),  and  C^saeius,  archbishop  of  Aries  (502-542).  Asso- 
ciated with  these  was  Fulgentius  of  Ruspe  (f  533),  in  the 
name  of  the  sixty  African  bishops  banished  by  the  Yandals 
and  then  living  in  Sardinia.' 

The  controversy  was  stirred  up  anew  by  the  Scythian 
monks,  who  in  their  zeal  for  the  Monophysite  theopaschitism, 
abhorred  everything  connected  with  Nestorianism,  and  urged 
first  pope  Horraisdas,  and  then  with  better  success  the  exiled 
African  bishops,  to  procure  the  condemnation  of  Semi-Pela- 
gianism. 

These  transactions  terminated  at  length  in  the  triumph  of 
a  moderate  Augustinianism,  or  of  what  might  be  called  Semi- 
Augustinianism,  in  distinction  from  Semi-Pelagianism.  At 
the  synod  of  Orange  (Arausio)  in  the  year  529,  at  which 
Csesarius  of  Aries  was  leader,  the  Semi-Pelagian  system,  yet 
without  mention  of  its  adherents,  was  condemned  in  twenty- 
five  chapters  or  canons,  and  the  Augustinian  doctrine  of  sin 
and  grace  was  approved,  without  the  doctrine  of  absolute  or 
particularistic  predestination.'^     A  similar  result  was  reached 

'  He  wrote  De  veritate  prEBdestinationia  et  gratise  Dei,  three  libb.  against 
Faustus.  He  uses  in  these  the  expression  prgedestinatio  duplex,  but  understands  by 
the  second  prsedestinatio  the  prasdestination  to  damnation,  not  to  sin,  and  censures 
those  who  affirmed  a  predestination  to  sin.  Yet  he  expressly  consigned  to  damna- 
tion all  uubaptized  children,  even  such  as  die  in  their  mother's  womb.  Comp. 
Wiggcrs,  ii.  p.  3'78. 

'■^  Comp.  the  transactions  of  the  Concilium  Arausicanum,  the  twenty-five  Capitula, 
and  the  Symbolum  in  the  Opera  Aug.  ed.  Bened.  Appendix  to  torn.  x.  157  sqq. ;  in 
Mansi,  tom.  viii.  p.  712  sqq. ;  and  in  Hefele,  ii.  p.  704  ff.  The  Benedictine  editors 
trace  back  the  several  Capitula  to  their  sources  in  the  works  of  Augustme,  Prosper, 
and  others. 


§   160.      VICTOET  OF  SEMI-AUGTJSTINTA^SISM.  867 

at  a  synod  of  Yalence  (Yalencia),  held  the  same  year,  but 
otherwise  unknown.' 

The  synod  of  Orange,  for  its  Augustinian  decisions  in 
anthropology  and  soteriology,  is  of  great  importance.  But  as 
the  chapters  contain  many  repetitions  (mostly  from  the  Bible 
and  the  works  of  Augustine  and  his  followers),  it  will  suffice 
to  give  extracts  containing  in  a  positive  form  the  most  impor- 
tant propositions. 

Chap,  1.  The  sin  of  Adam  has  not  injured  the  body  only, 
but  also  the  soul  of  man. 

2.  The  sin  of  Adam  has  brought  sin  and  death  upon  all 
mankind. 

3.  Grace  is  not  merely  bestowed  when  we  pray  for  it,  but 
grace  itself  causes  us  to  pray  for  it. 

5.  Even  the  beginning  of  faith,  the  disposition  to  believe, 
is  effected  by  grace. 

9.  All  good  thoughts  and  works  are  God's  gift. 

10.  Even  the  regenerate  and  the  saints  need  continually 
the  divine  help. 

12.  "What  God  loves  in  us,  is  not  our  merit,  but  his  own 
gift. 

13.  The  free  will  weakened^  in  Adam,  can  only  be  restored 
through  the  grace  of  baptism. 

16.  All  good  that  we  possess  is  God's  gift,  and  therefore 
no  one  should  boast. 

18.  Unmerited  grace  precedes  meritorious  works.^ 

19.  Even  had  man  not  fallen,  he  would  have  needed  divine 
grace  for  salvation. 

23.  When  man  sins,  he  does  his  own  will ;  when  he  does 
good,  he  executes  the  will  of  God,  yet  voluntarily. 

'  The  Acts  of  the  synod  of  Yalence,  in  the  metropolitan  province  of  Yienue, 
held  in  the  same  year  or  in  530,  have  been  lost.  Pagi,  and  the  common  view, 
place  this  synod  after  the  synod  of  Orange,  Hefele,  on  the  contrary  (ii.  'ZIS),  before 
it.    But  we  have  no  decisive  data. 

'  "  Arbitrium  voluntatis  in  primo  homine  injirmatum  "  (not  "  amissum  "). 

'  There  are  then  meritorious  works.  "  Debetur  merces  bonis  operibus,  si  fiant, 
sed  gratia  quae  non  debetur  prsecedit,  ut  fiant."  Chap.  18  taken  from  Augustine's 
Opus  imperf.  c.  Jul.  i.  c.  133  and  from  the  Sentences  of  Prosper  Aquitanus,  n.  297. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  Augustine  also  says :  "  Merita  nostra  sunt  Dei  munera." 


868  THEED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

25.  The  love  of  God  is  itself  a  gift  of  God. 

To  these  chapters  the  synod  added  a  Creed  of  anthropology 
and  soteriology,  which,  in  opposition  to  Semi-Pelagianism, 
contains  the  following  five  propositions : ' 

'  In  the  Latin  original,  the  Epilogus  reads  as  follows  (Aug.  Opera,  torn.  x. 
Appendix,  f.  159  sq.): 

"Ac  sic  secundum  suprascriptas  sanctarum  scripturarum  sententias  vel  antiquo- 
rum  patrum  definitiones  hoc,  Deo  propitiante,  et  prasdicare  debemus  et  credere,  quod 
per  peccatum  primi  hominis  ita  inclinatum  et  attenuatum  fuerit  Uberum  arbitrium, 
ut  nullus  postea  aut  diligere  Deum  sicut  oportuit,  aut  credere  in  Deum,  aut  operari 
propter  Deum  quod  bonum  est,  possit,  nisi  gratia  eum  et  misericordia  divina  pra3ve- 
nerit.  Unde  Abel  justo  et  Noe,  et  Abrahae,  et  Isaac,  et  Jacob,  et  omni  antiquorum 
sanctorum  multitudini  illam  prseclaram  fidem,  quam  in  ipsorum  laude  praedicat  aposto- 
lus Paulus,  non  per  bonum  naturae,  quod  prius  in  Adam  datum  fuerat,  sed  per  gratiam 
Dei  credimus  fuisse  collatam.  Quam  gratiam  etiam  post  adventum  Domini  omnibus 
qui  baptizari  desiderant,  non  in  libero  arbitrio  haberi,  sed  Christi  novimus  simul  et 
credimus  largitate  conferri,  secundum  illud  quod  jam  supra  dictum  est,  et  quod  pras- 
dicat  Paulus  apostolus :  Vobls  donatum  est  pro  Christo  non  solum  ut  in  ewn  credatis, 
sed  etiam  ut  pro  illo  patiamlrii  (Phil.  i.  29) ;  et  illud :  Deus  qui  cKpit  in  vobis  bonum 
opus,  perficiet  usque  in  diem  Domini  nostri  Jesu  Christi  (Phil.  i.  0) ;  et  illud :  Gra- 
tia salvi  facti  estis  per  fidem,  et  hoe  non  ex  vobis,  Dei  enim  donum  est  (Ephes.  ii.  8); 
et  quod  de  se  ipso  ait  apostolus :  Misericordiam  consecutus  sum  ut  fidelis  essem 
(1  Cor.  vii.  29);  non  dixit  quia  eram,  sed  ut  essem;  et  illud:  Quid  habes  quod  non 
accepisti?  (1  Cor.  iv.  *?);  et  illud:  Omne  datum  bonum  et  omne  donum  perfectum 
de  sursum  est,  descendens  a  Patre  luminum  (Jac.  i.  l*?);  et  illud:  Nemo  habet  quid- 
quam  boni,  nisi  illi  datum  fuerit  de  super  (Joann.  iii.'  23).  Innumerabilia  sunt  sanc- 
tarum scripturarum  testimonia  quffi  possunt  ad  probandam  gratiam  proferri,  sed 
brevitatis  studio  prtetermissa  sunt,  quia  et  revera  cui  pauca  non  sufflciunt  plura 
non  proderunt. 

"  Hoc  etiam  secundum  fidsm  catholicam  credimus,  quod  accepta  per  baptismum 
gratia,  omnes  baptizati,  Christo  auxihante  et  cooperante,  qua  ad  salutem  animae 
pertinent,  possint  et  debeant,  si  fideliter  laborare  voluerint,  adimplere. 

"  Aliquos  vero  ad  malum  divina  potestate  pra3destinatos  esse  non  solum  non 
credimus,  sed  etiam  si  sunt,  qui  tantum  malum  credere  velint,  cum  omni  detestatione 
ilUs  anathema  dicimus. 

"  Hoc  etiam  salubriter  profitemur  et  credimus,  quod  in  omni  opere  bono  non 
nos  incipimus  et  postea  per  Dei  misericordiam  adjuvamur,  sed  ipse  nobis,  nullis 
praBcedentibus  bonis  meritis,  et  fidem  et  amorem  sui  prius  inspirat,  ut  et  baptismi 
sacramenta  fideliter  requiramus,  et  post  baptismum  cum  ipsius  adjutorio  ea  quaj  sibi 
sunt  placita  implere  possimus.  Unde  manifestissime  credendum  est,  quod  et  illius 
latronis,  quern  Dominus  ad  paradisi  patriam  revocavit,  et  Cornelii  centurionis,  ad 
quern  angelus  Domini  missus  est,  et  Zachsei,  qui  ipsum  Dominum  suscipere  meruit, 
ilia  tam  admirabilis  fides  non  fuit  de  natura,  sed  divinai  largitatis  donum. 

"  Et  quia  definitionem  antiquorum  patrum  nostramque,  qute  suprascripta  est, 
non  solum  religiosis,  sed  etiam  laicis  medicamentum  esse,  et  desideramua  et  cupimus : 


§   ICO.      VICTORY   OF   SEMI-AUGUSTINIANISM.  869 

1.  Througli  tlie  fall  free  will  has  been  so  weakened,  that 
without  prevenient  grace  no  one  can  love  God,  believe  on 
Ilim,  or  do  good  for  God's  sake,  as  he  ought  {sicut  ojportuit, 
implying  that  he  may  in  a  certain  measure). 

2.  Through  the  grace  of  God  all  may,  by  the  co-operation 
of  God,  perform  what  is  necessary  for  their  soul's  salvation. 

3.  It  is  by  no  means  our  faith,  that  any  have  been  pre- 
destinated by  God  to  sin  {ad  malum),  but  rather :  if  there  are 
people  who  believe  so  vile  a  thing,  we  condemn  them  with 
utter  abhorrence  {cum  omni  detestatione).'^ 

4.  In  every  good  work  the  beginning  proceeds  not  from  us, 
but  God  inspires  in  us  faith  and  love  to  Him  without  merit 
precedent  on  our  part,  so  that  we  desire  baptism,  and  after 
baptism  can,  with  His  help,  fulfil  His  will. 

5.  Because  this  doctrine  of  the  fathers  and  the  synod  is  also 
salutary  for  the  laity,  the  distinguished  men  of  the  laity  also, 
who  have  been  present  at  this  solemn  assembly,  shall  subscribe 
these  acts. 

In  pursuance  of  this  requisition,  besides  the  bishops,  the 
Preefectus  prsetorio  Liberius,  and  seven  other  viri  illustres, 
signed  the  Acts.  This  recognition  of  the  lay  element,  in  view 
of  the  hierarchical  bent  of  the  age,  is  significant,  and  indicates 
an  inward  connection  of  evangelical  doctrine  with  the  idea  of 
the  universal  priesthood.  And  they  were  two  laymen,  we 
must  remember.  Prosper  and  Hilarius,  who  first  came  forward 
in  Gaul  in  energetic  opposition  to  Semi-Pelagianism  and  in 
advocacy  of  the  sovereignty  of  divine  grace. 

The  decisions  of  the  council  were  sent  by  CiEsarius  to 
Rome,  and  were  confirmed  by  pope  Boniface  II.  in  530, 
Boniface,  in  giving  his  approval,  emphasized  the  declaration, 
that  even  the  beginning  of  a  good  will  and  of  faith  is  a  gift  of 

placuit  ut  earn  etiam  illustres  ac  magnifici  viri,  qui  nobiscum  ad  prajfatam  festivita- 
tem  convenerunt,  propria  manu  subscriberent." 

Then  follow  the  names  of  fourteen  bishops  (headed  by  Csesarius)  and  eight  lay- 
men (headed  by  Petrus  Marcellinus  Felix  Liberius,  vir  clarissimus  et  illustris  Prae- 
fectus  Praitorii  Galliarum  atque  Patricius). 

'  This  undoubtedly  takes  for  granted,  that  Augustine  did  not  teach  this ;  and  in 
fact  he  taught  only  a  predestination  of  the  wicked  to  perdition,  not  a  predestmation 
to  sin. 


870  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

prevenient  grace,  wliile  Semi-Pelagianism  left  open  a  way  to 
Christ  without  grace  from  God.  And  beyond  question,  the 
church  was  fully  warranted  in  affirming  the  pre-eminence  of 
grace  over  freedom,  and  the  necessity  and  importance  of  the 
gratia  proiveniens. 

jSTotwithstanding  this  rejection  of  the  Semi-Pelagian  teach- 
ings (not  teachers),  they  made  their  way  into  the  church 
again,  and  while  Augustine  was  universally  honored  as  a 
canonized  saint  and  standard  teacher,  Cassian  and  Faustus  of 
Rhegium  remained  in  grateful  remembrance  as  saints  in 
France.' 

At  the  close  of  this  period  Gregory  the  Great  represents 
the  moderated  Augustinian  system,  with  the  gratia  prceveniens, 
but  without  the  gratia  irresistibilis  and  without  a  particularis- 
tic decretum  dbsolutwn.  Through  him  this  milder  Augustin- 
ianism  exerted  great  influence  upon  the  mediaeval  theology. 
Yet  the  strict  Augustinianism  always  had  its  adherents,  in 
such  men  as  Bede,  Alcuin,  and  Isidore  of  Seville,  who  taught 
a  gemina  2>T(iedestinatio,  sive  electorum  ad  salutem,  sive  I'epro- 
borum  ad  mortem ;  it  became  prominent  again  in  the  Gott- 
schalk  controversy  in  the  ninth  century,  was  repressed  by 
scholasticism  and  the  prevailing  legalism ;  was  advocated  by 
the  precursors  of  the  Reformation,  especially  by  Wiclif  and 
Huss;  and  in  the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century,  it 
gained  a  massive  acknowledgment  and  an  independent  develop- 
ment in  Calvinism,  which,  in  fact,  partially  recast  it,  and  gave 
it  its  most  consistent  form, 

^  Comp.  respecting  the  further  history  of  anthropology  Wiggers  :  Schicksale  der 
augustinisehen  Anthropologie  von  der  Verdammung  des  Semipelagianismus  auf  den 
Synoden  zu  Orange  und  Valence,  529,  bis  zur  Eeaction  des  Monchs  Gottschalk  fiir 
den  Augustinismus,  in  Niedner's  "Zeitschrift  f\ir  hist.  Theologie,"  1854,  p.  1  ff. 


CHAPTEK  X. 

CHUBCH  FATHEKS,  AXD  THEOLOGICAL  LITERATUKE. 

Comp,  the  general  literature  on  the  Fathers  in  vol.  i.  §  116,  and  the  special 
literature  in  the  several  sections  following. 


I. — The  Greek  Fathers. 
161.     Eusehius  of  Ccesarea. 


/^% 


\£^  •  risy 


EusEBirs  Pamphili  :  Opera  omnia  Gr.  et  Lat.,  curis  variorum  nempe  U.   J9^y,  J#.->A*». 
Valesii,  Ft.  Vigeri,  B.  Montfaucon^  Card.  Angela  Mail  edita;  coUegit  ; 

et  denuo  recognovit  /.  P.  Migne.    Par.  (Petit-Montrouge)  1857. 6/' 

vols.  (tom.  xix.-xxiv.  of  Migne's  Patrologia  Grffica).  /Df  his  several 
works  his   Church  History  has  been  oftenest  edited,  sometimes  by 
itself,  sometimes  in  connection  with  his  Vita  Constantini,  and  with 
the  church  histories  of  his  successors;  best  by  Eenr.  Valeshis  (Di    /^ 
-Xalois),  Par.  1659-'73,  3  vols.,  and  Cantabr.  1720,  3  vols.,  and  againV- 
1746  (with  additions  by  G.  Beading,  best  ed.) ;  also  (without  the  later 
historians)  by  B.  Zimmermann,  Francof.  1822 ;  F.  A.  Jleinichen,  Lips. 
1827-8,  3  YO^TFTBwrton,  Oxqn.  1838,  2  vols.  (1845  and  1856  in  1    /^jf  «'*^'**^ 
voy ;  Schwegler,  Tiib.  1852;  also  in  various  translations:  In  German        ^A^f^y^^^**^ 
by  Stroth,  Quedlinburg,  1776  ff.,  2  vols. ;  by  Clo&s,  Stuttg.  1839 ;  and       /?<^SLv* 
several  times  in  French  and  English ;  in  English  by  Hanmer  (1584),  ^    ,    * 

T.  Shorting,  and  better  by  Chr.  Fr.  Cruse  (an  Amer.  Episcopalian  of     ''*^'*  *^^ 
German  descent,  died  in  New  York,  1865):  The  Ecclesiastical  History   JkCl ,tf^tf^jf 
of  Euseb.  Pamph.,  etc.,  New  York,  1856  (10th  ed.),  and  Lond.  1858    /r»rf  Att^ 
(in  Bohn's  Eccles.  Library).     Comp.  also  the  literary  notices  in  Brunei,    fttitS^*        ^ 
sub  Euseb.,  and  James  Darling,  Cyclop.  Bibliograph.  p.  1072  ff.  tt^^  "^ 

IL  Biographies  by  Hieeonymus  (De  viris  illustr.  c.  81,  a  brief  sketch,  with  * 

a  list  of  his  works),  Valesius  (De  vita  scriptisque  Eusehii  Csesar.),  W. 
Cave  (Lives  of  the  most  eminent  Fathers  of  the  Church,  vol.  ii.  pp. 
95-144,  ed.  H.  Gary.  Oxf,  1840),  HEI^^CHEX,  Steoth,  CsrsE,  and 
others,  in  their  editions  of  the  Eccles.  Hist,  of  Eusebius.     F.  C.  Baue  : 


872  THLRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Oomparatur  Eusebius  hist.  eccl.  parens  cum  parente  List.  Herodoto. 
Tub.  1834.  H^nell:  De  Euseb.  Cass,  religionis  cbrist.  defensore. 
Gott.  1843.  Sam.  Lee  :  Introductory  treatise  in  his  Engl,  edition  of 
the  Theophany  of  Eusebius,  Oambr.  1843.  Semisoh:  Art.  Eusebius  v. 
Cses.  in  Herzog's  Encycl.  vol.  iv.  (1855),  pp.  229-238.  Lyman  Cole- 
man :  Eusebius  as  an  historian,  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  Andover, 
1858,  pp.  78-96.^The  biography  by  Acacius,  his  successor  in  the  see 
of  OsBsarea,  Socr.  ii.  4,  is  lost.) 

This  third  period  is  uncommonly  rich  in  great  teachers  of 
the  church,  who  happily  united  theological  ability  and  prac- 
tical piety,  and  who,  by  their  development  of  the  most  import- 
ant dogmas  in  conflict  with  mighty  errors,  earned  the  gratitude 
of  posterity.  They  monopolized  all  the  learning  and  eloquence 
of  the  declining  Roman  empire,  and  made  it  subservient  to  the 
cause  of  Christianity  for  the  benefit  of  future  generations. 
They  are  justly  called  fathers  of  the  church ;  they  belong  to 
Christendom  without  distinction  of  denominations;  and  they 
still,  especially  Athanasius  and  Chrysostom  among  the  Greek 
fathers,  and  Augustine  and  Jerome  among  the  Latin,  by  their 
writings  and  their  example,  hold  powerful  sway,  though  with 
different  degrees  of  authority  according  to  the  views  enter- 
tained by  the  various  churches  concerning  the  supremacy  of 
the  Bible  and  the  value  of  ecclesiastical  tradition. 

"We  begin  the  series  of  the  most  important  T^icene  and  post- 
!Nicene  divines  with  Eusebiijs  of  Cassarea,  the  "father  of 
church  history,"  the  Christian  Herodotus. 

He  was  born   about  the   year  260  or  270,  probably  in 

Palestine,   and    was    educated    at  Antioch,   and    afterwards 

at  Csesarea  in  Palestine,  under  the  influence  of  the  works  of 

■*?'."  V        Origen.     He  formed  an  intimate  friendship  with  the  learned 

V  ^ .  '^-^^M^ .    presbyter  Pamphilus,'  who  had  collected  a  considerable  bib- 

^  rt  .  •  '•-/    -^^^^^  ^^^^  patristic  library,  and  conducted  a  flemishing  theolog- 

•^y  _-•  '  Hence  the  surname  Ei'/o-e'^ios  {b  cpiAos)  rod  Uaix(pi\ov,  Pamphili,  by  which 


r 


e  V>V» 


anciently  he  was  most  frequently  distinguished  from  many  other  less  noted  men 
of  the  same  name,  e.  g. :  Eusebius  of  Nicomedia  (f  341),  Eusebius  of  Vercelli 
(f  371),  Eusebius  Emesenus,  of  Emesa  or  Emisa  in  Phoenicia  (f  360),  and  others. 
On  this  last  comp.  Opuscida  quas  supersunt  Graeca,  ed.  August!,  Elberfcld,  1829, 
somewhat  hastily ;  corrected  by  Thilo,  Ueber  die  Schriften  des  Euseb.  von  Alex, 
und  des  Euseb.  von  Emisa,  Halle,  1832. 


§   161.      EUSEBIUS   OF   CiESAHEA.  873 

ical  school  which  he  had  founded  at  Csesarea,  till  in  809  he 
died  a  martyr  in  the  persecution  under  Diocletian.'  Eusebius 
taught  for  a  long  time  in  this  school ;  and  after  tlie  death  of 
his  preceptor  and  friend,  he  travelled  to  Tyre  and  to  Egypt, 
and  was  an  eye-witness  of  the  cruel  scenes  of  the  last  great 
persecution  of  the  Christians.  He  was  imprisoned  as  a  con- 
fessor, but  soon  released. 

Twenty  years  later,  when  Eusebius,  presiding  at  the  coun- 
cil at  Tyre  (335  or  336),  took  sides  against  Athanasius,  the 
bishop  Potamon  of  Heraclea,  according  to  the  account  of 
Epiphanius,  exclaimed  in  his  face :  "  How  dost  thou,  Eusebius, 
sit  as  judge  of  the  innocent  Athanasius  ?  "Who  can  bear  it  ? 
"Why  !  didst  thou  not  sit  with  me  in  prison  in  the  time  of  the 
tyrants  ?  They  plucked  out  my  eye  for  my  confession  of  the 
tnith ;  thou  camest  forth  unhurt ;  thou  hast  suffered  nothing 
for  thy  confession ;  unscathed  thou  art  here  present.  How 
didst  thou  escape  from  prison  ?  On  some  other  ground  than 
because  thou  didst  promise  to  do  an  unlawful  thing  [to  sacri- 
fice to  idols]?  or,  perchance,  didst  thou  actually  do  this?" 
But  this  insinuation  of  cowardice  and  infidelity  to  Christ  arose 
probably  from  envy  and  party  passion  in  a  moment  of  excite- 
ment. With  such  a  stain  upon  him,  Eusebius  w^ould  hardly 
have  been  intrusted  by  the  ancient  chm*ch  with  the  episcopal 
Btaff.^ 

About  the  year  315,  or  earlier,  Eusebius  was  chosen  bishop 
of  Cffisarea,'  where  he  labored  till  his  death  in  310.  The 
patriarchate  of  Antioch,  which  was  conferred  upon  him  after 
the  deposition  of  Eustathius  in  331,  he  in  honorable  self-denial, 
and  from  preference  for  a  more  quiet  literary  life,  declined. 

He  was  drawn  into  the  Arian  conti'oversies  against  his 
will,  and  played  an  eminent  part  at  the  council  of  !Nic£ea, 
where  he  held  the  post  of  honor  at  the  right  hand  of  the  pre- 
siding emperor.     In  the  perplexities  of  this  movement  he  took 

'  Jerome  remarks  of  Pamphilus  (De  viris  illuBtribus,  c.  75) :  "  Tanto  bibliothecae 
divinre  amore  flagravit,  ut  maximam  partem  Origenis  voluminum  sua  mami  descrip- 
serit,  qufe  usque  hodie  [a.  392]  in  Cassariensi  bibliotheca  habentur." 

^  So  Valesius  also  views  the  matter,  while  Baronius  puts  faith  in  the  rebuke. 

'^  Hence  he  is  also  called  Eusebius  Csesariensis  or  Palestinus. 


874  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

middle  ground,  and  endeavored  to  unite  the  opposite  parties. 
This  brought  him,  on  the  one  hand,  the  peculiar  favor  of  the 
emperor  Constantine,  but,  on  the  other,  from  the  leaders  of 
the  Nicene  orthodoxy,  the  suspicion  of  a  secret  leaning  to  the 
Arian  heresy.'  It  is  certain  that,  before  the  council  of  j^icsea, 
he  sympathized  with  Arius ;  that  in  the  council  he  proposed 
an  orthodox  but  indefinite  compromise-creed;  that  after  the 
council  he  was  not  friendly  with  Athanasius  and  other  defend- 
ers of  orthodoxy ;  and  that,  in  the  synod  of  Tyre,  which  de- 
posed Athanasius  in  335,  he  took  a  leading  part,  and,  accord- 
ing to  Epiphanius,  presided.  In  keeping  with  these  facts  is 
his  silence  respecting  the  Arian  controversy  (which  broke  out 
in  318)  in  an  Ecclesiastical  History  which  comes  down  to  324, 
and  was  probably  not  completed  till  326,  when  the  council  of 
Nicsea  would  have  formed  its  most  fitting  close.  He  would 
rather  close  his  history  with  the  victory  of  Constantine  over 
Licinius  than  with  the  Creed  over  which  theological  parties 
contended,  and  with  which  he  himself  was  implicated.  But, 
on  the  other  hand,  it  is  also  a  fact  that  he  subscribed  the 
!Nicene  Creed,  though  reluctantly,  and  reserving  his  own  inter- 

*  So  thought,  among  the  ancients,  Hilary,  Jerome  (who  otherwise  speaks  favora- 
bly of  Eusebius),  Theodoret,  and  the  second  council  of  Nicaea  (a.  d.  VSV),  which 
imjustly  condemned  him  even  expressly,  as  an  Arian  heretic ;  and  so  have  thought, 
among  moderns,  Baronius,  Petavius,  Clericus,  Tillemont,  Gieseler ;  while  the  church 
historian  Socrates,  the  Roman  bishops  Gelasius  and  Pelagius  11.,  Valesius,  G.  Bull, 
Cave  (who  enters  into  a  full  vindication,  1.  c.  p.  135  sqq.),  and  Sam.  Lee  (and  most 
Anglicans),  have  defended  the  orthodoxy  of  Eusebius,  or  at  least  mention  him  with 
very  high  respect.  The  Gallican  church  has  even  placed  him  in  the  catalogue  of 
saints.  Athanasius  never  expressly  charges  him  with  apostasy  from  the  Nicene  faith 
to  Arianism  or  to  Semi-Arianism,  but  frequently  says  that  before  325  he  held  with 
Arius,  and  changed  his  opinion  at  Nicaea.  This  is  the  view  of  Mohler  also  (Athana- 
sius der  Grosse,  p.  333  ff.),  whom  Dorner  (History  of  Christology,  i.  792)  inaccu- 
rately reckons  among  the  opponents  of  the  orthodoxy  of  Eusebius.  The  testimonies 
of  the  ancients  for  and  against  Eusebius  are  collected  in  Migne's  edition  of  his  works, 
tom.  i.  pp.  68-98.  Among  recent  writers  Dr.  Samuel  Lee  has  most  fully  investigated 
the  orthodoxy  of  Eusebius  in  the  Preliminary  Dissertation  to  his  translation  of  the 
Theophania  from  the  Syriac,  pp.  xxiv.-xcix.  He  arrives  at  the  conclusion  (p.  xcviii.), 
"  that  Eusebius  was  no  Arian ;  and  that  the  same  reasoning  must  prove  that  he  was 
no  Semi-Arian ;  that  he  did  in  no  degree  partake  of  the  error  of  Origen,  ascribed  to 
him  so  positively  and  so  groundlessly  by  Photius."  But  this  is  merely  a  negative 
result. 


6/    ^ 


^>^  cW<^,  J^ea^ c^  ,   J^y^^  «^^  - 


§   161.      EUSEBirS   OF  C^SAKEA.  875 

pretation  of  the  homoousion  /  that  he  publicly  recommended 
it  to  the  people  of  his  diocese ;  and  that  he  never  formally 
rejected  it. 

The  only  satisfactory  solution  of  this  apparent  inconsistency 
is  to  be  found  in  his  own  indecision  and  leaning  to  a  doctrinal 
latitudinarianism,  not  unfrequent  in  historians  who  become 
familiar  with  a  vast  variety  of  opinions  in  diiferent  ages  and 
countries.-^  On  the  important  point  of  the  homoousion  he 
never  came  to  a  firm  and  final  conviction.  He  wavered  be- 
tween the  older  Origenistic  subordinationism  and  the  JSTicene 
orthodoxy.  He  asserted  clearly  and  strongly  with  Origen  the 
eternity  of  the  Son,  and  so  far  was  decidedly  opposed  to  Arian- 
ism,  which  made  Christ  a  creature  in  time ;  but  he  recoiled 
from  the  homoousion^  because  it  seemed  to  him  to  go  beyond 
the  Scriptures,  and  hence  he  made  no  use  of  the  term,  either 
in  his  book  against  Marcellus,  or  in  his  discourses  against 
Sabellius.  Religious  sentiment  compelled  him  to  acknowledge 
the  full  deity  of  Christ ;  fear  of  Sabellianism  restrained  him. 
He  avoided  the  strictly  orthodox  formulas,  and  moved  rather 
in  the  less  definite  terms  of  former  times.  Theological  acumen 
he  constitutionally  lacked.  He  was,  in  fact,  not  a  man  of  con- 
troversy, but  of  moderation  and  j)eace.  He  stood  upon  the 
border  between  the  ante-Mcene  theology  and  the  Nicene. 
His  doctrine  shows  the  color  of  each  by  turns,  and  reflects  the 
unsettled  problem  of  the  church  in  the  first  stage  of  the  Ariau 


controversy.  '^ 

With  his  theological  indecision  is  connected  his  weakness 
of  character.  He  was  an  amiable  and  pliant  court-theologian, 
and  suffered  himself  to  be  blinded  and  carried  away  by  the 
splendor  of  the  first  Christian  emperor,  his  patron  and  friend. 
Constantine  took  him  often  into  his  counsels,  invited  him  to 
his  table,  related  to  him  his  vision  of  the  cross,  showed  him 
the  famous  labarum,  listened  standing  to  his  occasional  ser- 
mons, wrote  him  several  letters,  and  intrusted  to  him  the 

"^  The  same  view  is  taken  substantially  by  Baur  (Geschichte  der  Lehre  von  der 
Dreieinigkeit  und  Menschwerdung,  i.  475  ff.),  Domer  (Entwicklungsgeschichte  der 
Lehre  von  der  Person  Christi,  i.  792  ff.),  Semisch  (Art.  Eusebius  in  Herzog's  Ency- 
klopiidie,  vol.  iv.  233),  and  other  modem  German  theologians. 


876  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

supervision  of  the  copies  of  the  Bible  for  the  use  of  the  churches 
in  Constantinople. 

At  the  celebration  of  the  thirtieth  anniversary  of  this  em- 
peror's reign  (336),  Eusebius  delivered  a  panegyric  decked 
with  the  most  pompous  hyperbole,  and  after  his  death,  in 
literal  obedience  to  the  maxim:  "De  mortals  nihil  nisi 
bonum,"  he  glorified  his  virtues  at  the  expense  of  veracity  and 
with  intentional  omission  of  his  faults.  With  all  this,  how- 
ever, he  had  noble  qualities  of  mind  and  heart,  which  in  more 
quiet  times  would  have  been  an  ornament  to  any  episcopal  see. 
And  it  must  be  said,  to  his  honor,  that  he  never  claimed  the 
favor  of  the  emperor  for  private  ends. 

The  theological  and  literary  value  of  Eusebius  lies  in  the 
province  of  learning.  He  was  an  unwearied  reader  and 
collector,  and  probably  surpassed  all  the  other  church  fathers, 
hardly  excepting  even  Origen  and  Jerome,  in  compass  of 
knowledge  and  of  acquaintance  with  Grecian  literature  both 
heathen  and  Christian ;  while  in  originality,  vigor,  sharpness, 
and  copiousness  of  thought,  he  stands  far  below  Origen,  Atha- 
nasius,  Basil,  and  the  two  Gregories.  His  scholarship  goes 
much  further  in  breadth  than  in  depth,  and  is  not  controlled 
and  systematized  by  a  philosophical  mind  or  a  critical  judg- 
ment. 

Of  his  works,  the  historical  are  by  far  the  most  celebrated 
and  the  most  valuable ;  to  wit,  his  Ecclesiastical  History^  his 
Chrordcle^  his  Life  of  Constantine,  and  a  tract  on  the  Martyrs 
of  Palestine  in  the  Diocletian  persecution.  The  position  of 
Eusebius,  at  the  close  of  the  period  of  persecution,  and  in  the 
opening  of  the  period  of  the  imperial  establishment  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  his  employment  of  many  ancient  documents,  some 
of  which  have  since  been  lost,  give  these  works  a  peculiar 
value.  He  is  temperate,  upon  the  whole,  impartial,  and  truth- 
loving — rare  virtues  in  an  age  of  intense  excitement  and  po- 
lemical zeal  like  that  in  which  he  lived.  The  fact  that  he 
was  the  first  to  work  this  important  field  of  theological  study, 
and  for  many  centuries  remained  a  model  in  it,  justly  entitles 
him  to  his  honorable  distinction  of  Father  of  Church  History. 
Yet  he  is  neither  a  critical  student  nor  an  elegant  writer  of 


§   161.      EUSEBITJS   OF   C-ESAKEA.  877 

history,  but  only  a  diligent  and  learned  collector.  His  Eccle- 
siastical History,  from  tlie  birth  of  Christ  to  the  victory  of 
Constantino  over  Licinius  in  324,  gives  a  colorless,  defect- 
ive, incoherent,  fragmentary,  yet  interesting  picture  of  the 
heroic  youth  of  the  church,  and  owes  its  incalculable  value, 
not  to  the  historic  art  of  the  author,  but  almost  entirely  to  his  * 
copious  and  mostly  literal  extracts  from  foreign,  and  in  some 
cases  now  extinct,  sources.  As  concerns  the  first  three  centu- 
ries, too,  it  stands  alone ;  for  the  successors  of  Eusebius  begin 
their  history  where  he  leaves  off. 

His  Chronicle  consists  of  an  outline-sketch  of  universal  his- 
tory down  to  325,  arranged  by  ages  and  nations  (borrowed 
largely  from  the  Chronography  of  Julius  Africanus),  and  an 
abstract  of  this  universal  chronicle  in  tabular  form.  The 
Greek  original  is  lost,  with  the  exception  of  unconnected  frag- 
ments by  Syncellus ;  but  the  second  part,  containing  the  chron- 
ological tables,  was  translated  and  continued  by  Jerome  to 
378,  and  remained  for  centuries  the  source  of  the  synchronistic 
knowledge  of  history  and  the  basis  of  historical  works  in  Chris- 
tendom.* Jerome  also  translated,  with  several  corrections  and 
additions,  a  useful  antiquarian  work  of  Eusebius,  the  so-called 
Onomasticon,  a  description  of  the  places  mentioned  in  the 
Bible.^ 

In  his  Life,  and  still  more  in  his  Eulogy,  of  Constantino, 
Eusebius  has  almost  entirely  forgotten  the  dignity  of  the  his- 
torian in  the  zeal  of  the  panegyrist.  Nevertheless,  this  work 
is  the  chief  source  of  the  history  of  the  reign  of  his  imperial 
friend.' 

'  The  Greek  title  was :  XpoviKuv  kuvSvuv  TravTodaTrr]   hropia  (Hieron.  De  viiis 
illustr.  c.  81) ;  the  Latin  is :  Chronica  Eusebii  s.  Canones  historise  universse,  Hiero- 
nvmo  interprete.     See  Yallarsi's  ed.  of  Jerome's  works,  torn,  viii,  1-820.     Jerome 
also  calls  it  Temporum  librum.     It  is  now  known  also  (since  1818)  in  an  Armenian  UA^^^^l/'t'^  ' 
-*K««taTW5^   IfoBt  Complete  editionby  Augelo  Mai,  in  Script,  vet.  nova  coll.  to™-  "i^/^V*^  *^,  V 
viii.  Rom.  1833,  republished  in  Migne's  edition  of  the  complete  works  of  Eusebius,  j^    y^*^  "-O*^, 
torn.  i.  p.  100  sqq.'^y  H;  fcA  .    .-■-    J-l<-f<:^'  J  r^\C  •'■<->     '  -  ■  f .  k  ,  ,'  n'  6 ^\  """^     ;> 

^  Tlepl  Twii  ToiriKcev  oi/oixarcov  ruy  tv  t^  Snia  ypa<l>^,  De  situ  et  nominibus  locorum*'/«y 
Hebraicorum,  in  Jerome's  works,  tom.  iii.  121-290.    A  new  edition,  Greek  and        /"^»  2  Pv^ 
Latin,  by  Larsow  and  Parthey,  BeroL  1862.  f^  <*i^j>^" 

"  Socrates  already  observes  (in  the  first  book  of  his  Church  History)  that  Euse- 
bius wrote  the  Life  of  Constantine  more  as  a  panegyrical  oration  than  as  an  accurate 


;/ 


8Y8  THrRD  PEEIOD.  A.D.   311-590. 

'Next  in  importance  to  his  historical  works  are  his  apol- 
ogetic ;  namely,  his  I^rcBjjaratio  evangelica,^  and  his  Demon- 
stratio  evangelica?  These  were  both  written  before  324,  and 
are  an  arsenal  of  the  apologetic  material  of  the  ancient  chm'ch. 
The  former  proposes,  in  fifteen  books,  to  give  a  documentary 
refutation  of  the  heathen  religions  from  Greek  writings.  The 
latter  gives,  in  twenty  books,  of  which  only  the  first  ten  are 
preserved,  the  positive  argument  for  the  absolute  truth  of 
Christianity,  fi'om  its  nature,  and  from  the  fulfilment  of  the 
prophecies  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  TTieophany^  in  five 
books,  is  a  popular  compend  from  these  two  works,  and  was 
probably  written  later,  as  Epiphanius  vsrote  his  Anacephalseosis 
after  the  Panarion,  for  more  general  use.'  It  is  known  in  the 
Greek  original  from  fragments  only,  published  by  Cardinal 
Mai,*  and  now  complete  in  a  Syriac  version  which  was  discov- 
ered in  1839  by  Tattam,  in  a  Nitrian  monastery,  and  was 

account  of  events.    Baronius  (Annal.  ad  an.  324,  n.  5)  compares  the  Vita  Constan- 

tini,  not  xmfitly,  with  the  Cyropaedia  of  Xenophon,  who,  as  Cicero  says,  "vitam 

Cyri  non  tarn   ad    historise  fidem   conscripsit,  quam   ad  efSgiem  justi  principis 

exhibendam."     Tliis  is  the  most  charitable  construction  we  can  put  upon  this 

book,  the  tone  of  which  is  intolerably  offensive  to  a  manly  and  independent  spirit 

acquainted  with  the  crimes  of  Constantine.     But  we  should  remember  that  stronger 

men,  such  as  Athanasius,  Hilary,  and  Epiphanius,  have  overrated  Constantino,  and 

^  called  him  "most  pious"  and  "of  blessed  memory."    Bdrckhardt,  in  his  work 

on  Constantine,  p.  S-46  and  passim,  speaks  too  contemptuously  of  Eusebius,  without 

any  reference  to  his  good  quaUties  and  great  merits. 

ln*t  Cm  ^  '^Qii  edited  by  Thomas  Gaisford,  Oxon.  1843,  4  vols.  8vo.     In  Migne's  edi- 

(_,    ,    ,  '^  tion  it  forms  torn.  iii. 

'  Likewise  edited  by  Gaisford,  Oxf.  1852,  2  vols.  8vo.  In  Migne's  edition 
torn.  iv. 

'  Dr.  Sam.  Lee,  however,  is  of  the  opposite  opmion,  see  p.  xxii.  of  the  Preface 
to  his  translation.  "It  appears  probable  to  me,"  he  says,  "that  this  more  popular 
and  more  useful  work  [the  Theophania]  was  first  composed  and  pubUshed,  and  that 
the  other  two  [the  Prgeparatio,  and  the  Demonstratio  Evangelica] — illustrating,  as 
they  generally  do,  some  particular  points  only — -'argued  in  order  in  our  work — were 
reserved  for  the  reading  and  occasional  writing  of  our  author  during  a  considerable 
number  of  years,  as  well  for  the  satisfaction  of  his  own  mind,  as  for  the  general 
reading  of  the  learned.  It  appears  probable  to  me,  therefore,  that  this  was 
one  of  the  first  productions  of  Eusebius,  if  not  the  first  after  the  persecutions 
ceased." 

*  In  the  fourth  volume  of  the  Xovse  Patrum  Bibhothecae,  Kom.  1847,  pp. 
108-156,  reprinted  in  Migne's  edition  of  the  works  of  Eusebius,  torn.  v.  609 
sqq. 


>7/4 


§  162.     THE  cnmcn  histoeijlns  aftee  eusebius.      879 

edited  by  Samuel  Lee  at  London  in  1842.'  To  this  class  also 
belongs  his  apologetic  tract  Against  Hierocles^ 

Of  much  less  importance  are  the  two  dogmatic  works  of 
Eusebius :  Against  Marcellus,  and  Upon  the  Clairch  Theology 
(likewise  against  Marcellus),  in  favor  of  the  hypostatical  exist- 
ence of  the  Son.' 

His  Commentaries  on  several  books  of  the  Bible  (Isaiah, 
Psalms,  Luke)  pm'sue,  without  independence,  and  without 
knowledge  of  the  Hebrew,  the  allegorical  method  of  Origen.V 

To  these  are  to  be  added,  finally,  some  works  in  Biblical 
Introduction  and  Archaeology,  the  Onomasticon,  already  alluded 
to,  a  sort  of  sacred,  geography,  and  fragments  of  an  enthusi- 
astic Apology  for  Origen,  a  juvenile  work  which  he  and  Pam- 
philus  jointly  produced  before  309,  and  which,  in  the  Ori- 
genistic  controversy,  was  the  target  of  the  bitterest  shots  of 
Epiphanius  and  Jerome.* 

§  162.     Ttie  Church  Historians  after  Eusehius. 

I.  The  Church  Histories  of  Soceates,  Sozomex,  Theodoeet,  Evageits, 
PHiLOSTOEGirs,  and  THEODOErs  Lectoe  have  been  edited,  -^vith  the 
Eccles.  Hist,  of  Eusebius,  by  Valesius,  Par.  1659-'73,  in  3  vols,  (defec- 
tive reprint,  Frankf.  a.  M.  1672-'79) ;  best  ed.,  Cambridge,  1720,  and 
again  1746,  in  3  vols.,  with  improvements  and  additions  by  G-uil. 
Reading.    Best  English  translation  by  Meredith,  Hanmer,  and  Wye 

'  Also  in  English,  under  the  title :  On  the  Theophania,  or  Divine  Manifestation 
of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  by  Eusebius,  translated  into  English,  with  Notes,  from 
an  ancient  Syriac  Version  of  the  Greek  original,  now  lost ;  to  which  is  prefixed  a 
Vindication  of  the  orthodoxy,  and  prophetical  views,  of  that  distinguished  writer,  by 
Sam.  Lee,  D.  D.,  Cambr.  1843.  The  MS.  of  this  work  is  deposited  in  the  British 
Museum ;  it  was  written  at  Edessa  in  the  Estranghelo,  or  old  church-handwriting  of 
the  Syrians,  on  very  fine  and  well-prepared  skin.  Dr.  Lee  assigns  it  to  the  year  411 
(L  c.  p.  xii.). 

^  In  Migne's  edition,  tom.  iv.  795-868. 

3{In  Migne's  edition,  tom.  vi.  p.  707  sqq. 

*  Angelo  Mai  has  published  new  fragments  of  Commentaries  of  Eusebius  on  the 
Psalms  and  on  the  Gospel  of  Luke  in  Xovse  Patrum  Bibhothecse,  tom.  iv.  p.  77  sqq. 
and  p.  160  sqq.,  and  republished  in  Migne's  ed.  vol.  vi. 

'  The  sixth  book  was  added  by  Eusebius  alone  after  the  death  of  his  friend. 
The  first  book  is  still  extant  in  the  Latin  version  of  Kufinus,  and  some  extracts  in 
Photius. 


880  THIRD   PEEIOB.    A.D.    311-590. 

Saltonstall,  Cambr.  1683, 1692,  and  London,  1709.  New  ed.  in  Bolin's 
Ecclesiastical  Library,  Lond.  1851,  in  4  vols,  small  8vo. 
II.  r.  A.  HoLZHATJSEJT :  De  fontibns,  quibus  Socrates,  Sozomenus,  ac  Theo- 
doretus  in  scribenda  historia  sacra  usi  sunt.  Gott.  1825.  G.  Daxgees: 
De  fontibus,  indole  et  dignitate  libron;m  Theod.  Lectoris  et  Evagrii. 
Gott.  1841.  J,  G.  Dowlixg:  An  Introduction  to  the  Critical  Study 
of  Eccl.  History.  Loud.  1838,  p.  34  ff.  F.  Ohr.  Baue:  Die  Epocben 
der  kirchlicben  Gescbichtscbreibung.  Tlib.  1852,  pp.  7-32.  Comp. 
P.  ScHAFF :  History  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  Gen.  Introd.  p.  52  f. 

EusEBius,  ■without  intending  it,  founded  a  school  of  church 
historians,  who  continued  the  thread  of  his  story  from  Con- 
stantine  the  Great  to  the  close  of  the  sixth  century,  and,  like 
him,  limited  themselves  to  a  simple,  credulous  narration  of 
external  facts,  and  a  collection  of  valuable  documents,  without 
an  inkling  of  the  critical  sifting,  philosophical  mastery,  and 
artistic  reproduction  of  material,  wliich  we  find  in  Thucydides 
and  Tacitus  among  the  classics,  and  in  many  a  modem  histo- 
rian. None  of  them  touched  the  history  of  the  fii'st  three  cen- 
turies ;  Eusebius  was  supposed  to  have  done  here  all  that  could 
be  desired.  The  histories  of  Socrates,  Sozomen,  and  Theod- 
oret  run  nearly  parallel,  but  without  mutual  acquaintance  or 
dependence,  and  their  contents  are  very  similar/  Evagrius 
carried  the  narrative  down  to  the  close  of  the  sixth  century. 
All  of  them  combine  ecclesiastical  and  political  history,  which 
after  Constantino  were  inseparably  interwoven  in  the  East; 
and  (with  the  exception  of  Philostorgius)  all  occuj^y  essentially 
the  same  orthodox  stand-point.  They  ignore  the  Western 
church,  except  where  it  comes  in  contact  with  the  East. 

These  successors  of  Eusebius  are : 

SocEATES,  an  attorney  or  scholasticus  in  Constantinople, 
born  in  380.  His  work,  in  seven  books,  covers  the  period 
from  306  to  439,  and  is  valuable  for  its  numerous  extracts 

'  The  frequent  supposition  (of  Valois  with  others)  that  Sozomen  wrote  to  com- 
plete Socrates,  and  Theodorct  to  complete  both,  caimot  be  proved.  The  authors 
seem  independent  of  one  another.  Theodoret  says  in  the  Prooemium :  "  Since 
Eusebius  of  Palestine,  commencing  his  history  with  the  holy  apostles,  has  described 
the  events  of  the  church  to  the  reign  of  the  God-beloved  Con^tantine,  I  have  begun 
my  history  where  he  ended  his."  He  makes  no  mention  of  any  other  writers  on  tlic 
same  subject.  Nor  does  Sozomen,  1.  i.  c.  1,  where  he  alludes  to  his  predecessors. 
Valesius  charges  Sozomen  with  plagiarism. 


§  162.      THE   CHURCH    HISTORIANS   AFTER   EUSEBIU8.         881 

from  sources,  and  its  calm,  impartial  representation.  It  has 
been  charged  with  a  leaning  towards  Novatianism.  He  had 
upon  the  whole  a  higher  view  of  the  duty  of  the  historian  than 
his  contemporaries  and  successors;  he  judged  more  liberally 
of  heretics  and  schismatics,  and  is  less  extravagant  in  the 
praise  of  emperors  and  bishops.' 

Hermias  Sozomen",  a  native  of  Palestine,  a  junior  contempo- 
rary of  Socrates,  and  likewise  a  scholasticus  in  Constantinople, 
wrote  the  history  of  the  church,  in  nine  books,  from  323  to  the 
death  of  Ilonorius  in  423,''  and  hence  in  its  subjects  keeps  pace 
for  the  most  part  with  Socrates,  though,  as  it  would  appear, 
without  the  knowledge  of  his  work,  and  with  many  additions 
on  the  history  of  the  hermits  and  monks,  for  whom  he  had  a 
great  predilection.' 

Tiieodoret,  bishop  of  Cyrus,  was  born  at  Antioch  about 
390,  of  an  honorable  and  pious  mother ;  educated  in  the  cloister 
of  St.  Euprepius  (perhaps  with  Nestorius) ;  formed  upon  the 
writings  of  Diodorus  of  Tarsus  and  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia ; 
made  bishop  of  Cyros,  or  Cyrrhos,  in  Syria,  after  420 ;  and 
died  in  457.  He  is  known  to  us  from  the  Christological  con- 
troversies as  the  most  scholarly  advocate  of  the  Antiochian 
dyophysitism  or  moderate  Nestorianism ;  condemned  at  Ephe- 
sus  in  431,  deposed  by  the  council  of  Kobbers  in  449,  ac- 
quitted in  451  by  the  fourth  ecumenical  council  on  condition  of 
his  condemning  Kestorius  and  all  deniers  of  the  theotolcos,  but 
again  partially  condemned  at  the  fifth  long  after  his  death. 
He  was,  therefore,  like  Eusebius,  an  actor  as  well  as  an  author 
of  church  history.  As  bishop,  he  led  an  exemplary  life,  his 
enemies  themselves  being  judges,  and  was  especially  benevolent 
to  the  poor.  He  owned  nothing  valuable  but  books,  and  ap- 
plied the  revenues  of  his  bishopric  to  the  public  good.  He 
shared  the  superstitions  and  weaknesses  of  his  age. 

His  Ecclesiastical  History,  in  five  books,  composed  about 
450,  reaches  from  325  to  429.     It  is  the  most  valuable  con- 

'  Separate  edition  by  Husset:  Socratis  scholastici  Historia  Eccl.  Oxon.  1853,  3 
vols.  8vo. 

^  According  to  the  usual,  but  incorrect  statement,  to  the  year  439. 

^  He  informs  us  (Book  v.  c.  15)  that  his  grandfather,  with  his  whole  family,  was 
converted  to  Christianity  by  a  miracle  of  the  monk  Hilarion. 
VOL.  TI. — 5R 


S82  THERD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

tinuation  of  Eiisebius,  and,  though  shorter,  it  fui'nishes  an 
essential  suj)plement  to  the  works  of  Socrates  and  Sozomen. 

His  "Historia  religiosa"  consists  of  biographies  of  hermits 
and  monks,  written  with  great  enthusiasm  for  ascetic  holiness, 
and  with  many  fabulous  accessories,  accordhig  to  the  taste  of 
the  day.  His  "  Heretical  Fables," '  though  superficial  and 
marred  by  many  errors,  is  of  some  importance  for  the  history 
of  Cliristian  doctrine.  It  contains  a  severe  condemnation  of 
Nestorius,  which  we  should  hardly  expect  from  Theodoret.^ 

Theodoret  was  a  very  fruitful  author.  Besides  these  histo- 
ries, he  wrote  valuable  commentaries  on  most  of  the  books  of 
the  Old  Testament  and  on  all  the  Epistles  of  Paul ;  dogmatic 
and  polemic  works  against  Cyril  and  the  Alexandrian  Chris- 
tology,  and  against  the  heretics ;  an  apology  of  Christianity 
against  the  Greek  philosophy ;  and  sermons  and  letters.''' 

EvAGRius  (born  about  536  in  Syria,  died  after  594)  was  a 
lawyer  in  Antioch,  and  rendered  the  patriarch  Gregory  great 
service,  particularly  in  an  action  for  incest  in  588.  He  was 
twice  maiTied,  and  the  Antiochians  celebrated  his  second  wed- 
ding (592)  with  public  plays.  He  is  the  last  continuator  of 
Eusebius  and  Theodoret,  properly  so  called.  He  begins  his 
Ecclesiastical  History  of  six  books  with  the  council  of  Ephesus, 
431,  and  closes  it  with  the  twelfth  year  of  the  reign  of  the 
emperor  Maurice,  594.  He  is  of  special  importance  on  the 
IS'estorian   and   Eutychian   controversies;    gives   accounts  of 

'  AipeTiKTjj  KUKouvbias  e-!TiTo,uri,  in  five  books  ;  in  Scliulze's  edition  of  tlie  Opera, 
torn.  iv.  p.  280  sqq.  The  fifth  book  presents  a  summary  of  the  chief  articles  of  the 
orthodox  faith,  a  sort  of  dogmatical  compend. 

"  Book  iv.  ch.  12.  Gamier,  Cave,  and  Oudin  regard  this  anti-Xestorian  chapter 
as  a  later  interpolation,  though  wiihout  good  reason ;  Schulze  (note  in  loco,  torn.  iv. 
p.  368)  defends  it  as  genuine.  It  should  be  remembered  that  Theodoret  at  the 
council  of  Chalcedon  could  only  save  himself  from  expulsion  by  anathematizing 
Nestorius. 

'  Theodoreti  Opera  omnia  cura  et  studio  Jac.  Sirmondi,  Par.  1642,  4  vols,  fol., 
with  an  additional  vol.  v.  by  Gamwr,  1684.  Another  edition  by  /.  L.  Schulze, 
Halle,  1768-"74,  5  tom.  in  10  vols.,  which  has  been  republished  by  J.  P.  Migne, 
Par.  1860,  in  5  vols.  (Patrologia  Grajca,  tom.  Ixxx.-lxxxiv.).  The  last  volume  in 
Schulze's  and  Migne's  editions  contains  Garnier's  Auctarium  ad  opera  Thcod.  and 
his  Dissertations  on  the  life  and  on  the  faith  of  Theodoret,  and  on  the  fifth  ecumen- 
ical Synod.     Comp.  also  Schrockh,  Church  History,  vol.  xviii. 


§   162.      THE   CHURCH    HISTORIANS   AFTER   EUSEBIUS.         883 

bishops  and  monks,  churches  and  public  buildings,  earthquakes 
and  other  calamities ;  and  interweaves  political  history,  such 
as  the  wars  of  Chosroes  and  the  assaults  of  the  barbarians.' 
He  was  strictly  orthodox,  and  a  superstitious  venerator  of 
monks,  saints,  and  relics.* 

Theodoeus  Lector,  reader  in  the  church  of  Constantinople 
about  525,  compiled  an  abstract  from  Socrates,  Sozomen,  and 
Theodoret,  under  the  title  of  Historia  tripartita,  which  is  still 
extant  in  the  manuscript ; '  and  composed  a  continuation  of 
Socrates  from  431  to  518,  of  which  fragments  only  are  pre- 
served in  John  Damascenus,  Mlus,  and  JSTicephorus  Callisti.* 

Of  Philostorgius,  an  Arian  church  historian  (born  in  368), 
nothing  has  come  down  to  us  but  fragments  in  Ph©tius ;  and 
these  breathe  so  strong  a  partisan  spirit,  that  the  loss  of  the 
rest  is  not  to  be  regretted.  He  described  the  period  from  the 
commencement  of  the  Arian  controversy  to  tlie  reign  of  Yalen- 
tinian  HI.  a.  d.  423. 

The  series  of  the  Greek  church  historians  closes  with 
NicEPHOEUs  Callistus  or  Callisti  (i.  e.,  son  of  Callistns),^  who 
lived  at  Constantinople  in  the  fifteenth  century.  He  was  sur- 
prised that  the  voice  of  history  had  been  silent  since  the  sixth 
century,  and  resumed  the  long-neglected  task  where  his  prede- 
cessors had  left  it,  but  on  a  more  extended  plan  of  a  general 
history  of  the  catholic  church  from  the  beginning  to  the  year 
911.  "We  have,  however,  only  eighteen  books  to  the  death  of 
emperor  Phocas  in  610,  and  a  list  of  contents  of  five  other 
books.  He  made  large  use  of  Eusebius  and  his  successors,  and 
added  unreliable  traditions  of  the  later  days  of  the  Apostles, 

'  Yalesius  blames  him  "  quod  non  tantam  diligentiam  adhibuit  in  conquirendis 
antiqnitatis  ecclesiasticee  monumentis,  quam  in  legendis  profanis  auctoribus." 

*  The  first  edition  was  from  a  Parisian  manuscript  by  Eob.  Stepbanus,  Par. 
1544.  Valesius,  in  liis  complete  edition,  employed  two  more  manuscripts.  A  new 
edition,  according  to  the  text  of  Valesius,  appeared  at  Oxford  in  1844. 

^  Valesius  intended  to  edit  it,  and  contented  himself  with  giving  the  variations, 
since  the  book  furnished  nothing  new. 

*  Collected  in  the  edition  of  Valesius. 

^  Not  to  be  confounded  with  Xicephorus,  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  who  was 
deposed  during  the  image  controversy  and  died  828.  His  works,  among  which  is 
also  a  brief  Chronographia  ab  Adamo  ad  Michaelis  et  Theophili  tempora  (828),  form 
torn.  c.  in  Migue's  Patrologia  Grseca. 


884  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

the  history  of  Monophysitism,  of  monks  and  saints,  of  the  bar- 
barian irruptions,  &;c.  He,  too,  ignores  the  Pelagian  contro- 
versy, and  takes  little  notice  of  the  Latin  church  after  the  fifth 
century/ 

In  the  Latin  church — to  anticipate  thus  much — Eusebius 
found  only  one  .imitator  and  continuator,  the  presbyter  and 
monk  EuFiNUS,  of  Aquileia  (330-410).  He  was  at  first  a  friend 
of  Jerome,  afterwards  a  bitter  enemy.  He  translated,  with 
abridgments  and  insertions  at  his  pleasure,  the  Ecclesiastical 
History  of  Eusebius,  and  continued  it  to  Theodosius  the  Great 
(392).  Yet  his  continuation  has  little  value.  He  wrote  also 
biographies  of  hermits ;  an  exposition  of  the  Apostles'  Creed ; 
and  translations  of  several  works  of  Origeu,  with  emendations 
of  offensive  portions.^ 

Cassiodorijs,  consul  and  monk  (died  about  562),  composed 
a  useful  abstract  of  the  works  of  Socrates,  Sozomen,  and  Theod- 
oret,  in  twelve  books,  under  the  title  of  Historia  trij[>artita, 
for  the  Latin  chui'ch  of  the  middle  age. 

The  only  properly  original  contributions  to  church  history 
from  among  the  Latin  divines  were  those  of  Jerome  (f  419)  in 
his  biographical  and  literary  Catalogue  of  Illustrious-  Mea 
(written  in  392),  which  GEinsrADius,  a  Semi-Pelagian  presbyter 
of  South  Gaul,  continued  to  the  year  495.  SuLPicrus  Severus 
(t  420)  wi'ote  in  good  style  a  Sacred  History,  or  History  of  the 
Old  and  N'ew  Testament,  from  the  creation  down  to  the  year 
40(7;  and  Pattlus  Orosius  (about  415)  an  apologetic  Universal 
History,  which  hardly,  however,  deserves  the  name  of  a  his- 
tory. 

§  163.    Athanasius  the  Great. 

I.  S.  Athanasius  :  Opera  omnia  quae  extant  vel  quae  ejus  nomine  circum- 
feruntur,  etc.,  Gr.  et  lat.,  opera  et  studio  monachorum  ordinis  S.  Bene- 

'  First  edition  in  Latin  by  John  Lange,  Basil.  1553;  in  Greek  and  Latin  by 
Front.  Ducceus,  Par.  16&0,  in  2  vols.  There  exists  but  one  Greek  toanuscript  copy 
of  Nieephorus,  as  far  as  we  know,  which  is  in  the  possession  of  the  imperial  library 
of  Vienna. 

^  His  works  are  edited  by  Vallarsi,  Veron.  1745,  Tol.  i.  fol.  (unfinished).  The 
Ecclesiastical  History  has  several  times  appeared  separately,  and  was  long  a  needed 
substitute  for  Eusebius  in  the  West.  &  rr-/  .-a.iT 


^  • 


\  . 


NN    y. 


^  >  y 


^8f«  /•■3S/&t'^%       ^ 


163.      ATHANASIUS   TOE    GREAT. 


885 


5"^  i 


dicti  e  congregatione  S.  Mauri  {Jac.  Lopin  et  B.  de  Montfaucon). 
Paris,  1698.     3  torn.  fol.  (or  rather  2  tomi,  the  first  in  two  parts). 
This  is  the  most  elegant  and  correct  edition,  but  must  be  completed 
by  two  volumes  of  the  Collectio  nova  Patrum,  ed.  B.  de  Montfaucon. 
Par.  1706.    2  tom.  fol.    More  complete,  but  not  so  handsome,  is  the 
edition  of  1777,  Patav.,  in  4  vols.  fol.     (Brunet  says  of  the  latter : 
"Edition  moins  belle  et  moins  chere  que  celle  de  Paris,  mais  augmen-  ^  i  >^ 
tee  d'uu  4^  vol.,  lequel  renferme  les  opuscules  de  S.  Athan.,  tires  de  la         '^ 
Collectio  nova  du  P.  Montfaucon  et  des  Anecdota  de  "Wolf,  et  de  plus 
Vinterpretatio  Psalmorum.^'')    But  now  both  these  older  editions  need 
again  to  be  completed,  by  the  Syrian  Festal  Letters  of  Athauasius, 
discovered  by  Dr.  Tattam  in  a  Nitrian  monastery  in  1843 ;  edited  by 
W.  Cureton  in  Syriac  and  English  at  London  in  1846  and  1848  (and  in 
English  by  H.  Burgess  and  H.  Williams^  Oxf.  1854,  in  the  Libr.  of  the 
Fathers) ;  in  German,  with  notes  by  F.  Larsow,  at  Leipzig  in  1852  ;  and 
in  Syriac  and  Latin  by  Card.  Angelo  Mai  in  the  Nova  Patr.  Bibliothe- 
ca,  Rom.  1853,  tom.  vi.  pp.  1-168.     A  new  and  more  salable,  though 
less  accurate,  edition  of  the  Opera  omnia  Athan.  (a  reprint  of  the    5  .  <r 
Benedictine)  appeared  at  Petit-Montrouge  (Par.)  in  J.  P.  Mignes   %  Va 
Patrologia  Gr.  (tom.  xxv.-xxviii.),  1857,  in  4  vols.  .^  :^ 

The  more  important  dogmatic  works  of  Athanasius  have  been  -«     -^ 


\!;^- 


edited  separately  by  J.  G.  Thilo^  in  the  first  volume  of  the  Bibliotheca 


4 


NJ- 


Patrum  Gr^c.  dogmatica,  Lips.  1858 ;  and  in  an  English  translation, 
with  explanations  and  indexes,  by  J.  H.  Newman^  Oxf.  1842-'44  "S    \ 
(Library  of  the  Fathers,  vols.  8,  13,  19).  |  S 

11.  Gregokius  Naz.  :  Oratio  panegyrica  in  Magnum  Athanasium  (Orat.    » \   , 

sxi.).     Several  Vit^  Athan.  in  the  1st  vol.  of  the  Bened.  ed.  of  his  h  fiS)  ^  ^ 
Opera.jr'AcTA  Sanctoeum  for  May  2d.     G.  Hermant:  La  Vie  d'Atha-  s  j  g,^  -^ 
nase,  etc.     Par.  1679.    2  vols.     Tillejiont:  Memoires,  vol.  viii.  pp.U^  Vj     "^ 
2-258  (2d  ed.  Par.  1713).    TV.  Cave:    Lives  of  the  most  eminent^ 
Fathers  of  the  first  Four  Centuries,  vpl.  ii.  pp.  145-364  (Oxf.  ed.  of 
1840).    Schrookh:  Th.  xii.  pp.  101-270.    J.  A.  Mohler:  Athanasius 
der  Grosse  und  die  Kirche  seiner  Zeit,  besonders  im  Kampfe  mit  dem 
Arianismus.     Mainz,  1827.     2d  (title)   ed.  1844.     HEiXEicn  Voigt: 
Die  Lehre  des  heiligen  Athanasius  von  Alexandria  oder  die  kirchliche 
Dogmatik  des  4ten  Jahrhunderts  auf  Grund  der  biblischen  Lehre  vom 
Logos.     Bremen,  1861.    A.  P.  Stanley:  Lectures  on  the  History  of 
the  Eastern  Church.    New  York,  1862,  lecture  vii.  (pp.  322-358). /^-  ' 

ATHANAsros  is  the  theological  and  ecclesiastical  centre,  as 
his  senior  contemporary  Constantino  is  the  political  and  secu- 
lar, about  which  the  Nicene  age  revolves.  Both  bear  the  title 
of  the  Great ;  the  former  with  the  better  right,  that  his  great- 
ness was  intellectual  and  moral,  and  proved  itself  in  suffering, 


9 


886  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

and  through  years  of  warfare  against  mighty  eiTors  and  against 
the  imperial  court.  Athanasiiis  contra  mundum^  et  mun- 
dus  contra  Athanasium,  is  a  well-known  sentiment  which 
strikingly  expresses  his  fearless  independence  and  immovable 
fidelity  to  his  convictions.  He  seems  to  stand  an  unanswera- 
ble contradiction  to  the  catholic  maxim  of  authority:  Quod 
semjper^  quod  uhiqiie,  quod  ah  omnibus  creditum  est,  and 
proves  that  truth  is  by  no  means  always  on  the^ide  of  the 
majority,  but  may  often  be  very  unpopular. /^he  solitary 
Athanasius,  even  in  exile,  and  under  the  ban  of  council  and 
emjjeror,  was  the  bearer  of  the  truth,  and,  as  he  was  afterwards 
named,  the  "  father  of  orthodoxy." '  r 

On  a  martyrs'  day  in  313  the  bishop  Alexander  of  Alexan- 
dria saw  a  troop  of  boys  imitating  the  church  services  in  inno- 
cent sport,  Athanasius  playing  the  part  of  bishop,  and  per- 
forming baptism  by  immersion.^  He  caught  in  this  a  glimpse 
of  future  greatness;  took  the  youth  into  his  care;  and 
appointed  him  his  secretary,  and  afterwards  his  archdeacon. 
Athanasius  studied  j;he  classics,  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  the 
chmx-h  fathers,  and  meantime  lived  as  an  ascetic.  He  already 
sometimes  visited  St.  Anthony  in  his  solitude. 

In  the  year  325  he  accompanied  his  bishop  to  the  council 
of  ISiceea,  and  at  once  distinguished  himself  there  by  his  zeal 
and  ability  in  refuting  Arianism  and  vindicating  the  eternal 
deit}'  of  Christ,  and  incurred  the  hatred  of  this  heretical  party, 
which  raised  so  many  storms  about  his  life. 

In  the  year  328  ^  he  ^'^'as  nominated  to  the  episcopal  succes- 


'O  Traxrjp  rfjs  opho^olias.     So  Epiphanius  already  calls  him,  Hser.  69,  c.  2. 

^  So  Rufinus  relates,  H.  E.  1.  i.  c.  14.     Most  Roman  historians,  Uermant,  Tille- 

mont,  Butler,  and  the  author  of  the  Yita  Athan.  in  the  Bened.  ed.  (torn.  i.  p.  iii.) 

reject  this  legend,  partly  on  account  of  chronological  difficulty,  partly  because  it 

seemed  incompatible  with  the  dignity  of  such  a  saint.     Mohler  passes  it  in  silence. 

l/j^/T  ^  This  is  the  true  date,  accorduig  to  the /summaries  of  the  newly-discovered 

.  Festal  Letters  of  Athanasius,  and  not  "  a  few  weeks  [or  months  rather]  after  the 

■     t^\iJ     '  *^^^^^  ^^  '•^^  council,"  as  the  editor  of  the  English  translation  of  the  historical  tracts 

•AJ^      U»        °^  Athanasius  (Oxford  Library  of  the  Fathers,  1843,  Preface,  p.  xxi.),  and  even 

/     AAt£,'«vj  Stanley  (1.  c.  p.  325),  still  say.     The  older  hypothesis  rests  on  a  misapprehension  of 

/       . «     cL\jJl    tlie  TreVre  yu^yer  in  a  passage  of  Athanasius,  Apol.  pro  fuga  sua,  tom.  i.  P.  1,  p.  140, 

which  Theodore^rroneously  dates  from  the  close  of  the  council  of  Xicsca,  instead 

of  the  readmission  of  the  Mcletians  into  the  fellowship  of  the  church  (II.  E.  i.  26). 


/li(Ji'^^} 


jjLoo-a-^/  ^f'^'^  ^*<-y* 


/^iliifr*^ 


//^(rt^  ..^«1^^  ^^«^^  'tfi^^'*^  • 


§   163.      ATHANASIUS   THE   GEEAT.  887 

sion  of  Alexandria,  on  the  recommendation  of  tlie  dying  Alex- 
ander, and  by  the  voice  of  the  people,  thongh  not  yet  of  can- 
onical age,  and  at  first  disposed  to  avoid  the  election  by  flight ; 
and  thns  he  was  raised  to  the  highest  ecclesiastical  dignity  of 
the  East.  For  the  bishop  of  Alexandria  was  at  the  same  time 
metropolitan  of  Egypt,  Libya,  and  Pentapolis. 

But  now  immediately  began  the  long  series  of  contests 
with  the  Arian  party,  which  had  obtained  inflnence  at  the 
court  of  Constantino,  and  had  induced  the  emperor  to  recall 
Arius  and  his  adherents  from  exile.  Henceforth  the  personal 
fortunes  of  Athanasius  are  so  inseparably  interwoven  with  the 
history  of  the  Arian  controversy  that  Nicene  and  Athanasian 
are  equivalent  terms,  and  the  different  depositions  and  restora- 
tions of  Athanasius  denote  so  many  dejDressions  and  victories 
of  the  Nicene  orthodoxy.  Five  times  did  the  craft  and  power 
of  his  opponents,  upon  the  pretext  of  all  sorts  of  personal  and 
political  offences,  but  in  reality  on  account  of  his  inexorable 
opposition  to  the  Arian  and  Serai-Arian  heresy,  succeed  in 
deposing  and  banishing  him.  The  first  exile  he  spent  in 
Treves,  the  second  chiefly  in  Rome,  the  third  with  the  monks 
in  the  Egyptian  desert ;  and  he  employed  them  in  the  written 
defence  of  his  righteous  cause.  Then  the  Arian  party  was 
distracted,  first  by  internal  division,  and  further  by  the  death 
of  the  emperor  Constantius  (361),  who  was  their  chief  support. 
The  pagan  Julian  recalled  the  banished  bishops  of  both 
parties,  in  the  hope  that  they  might  destroy  one  another. 
Thus,  Athanasius  among  them,  who  was  the  most  downright 
opposite  of  the  Christian-hating  emperor,  again  received  his 
bishopric.  But  when,  by  his  energetic  and  wise  administra- 
tion, he  rather  restored  harmony  in  his  diocese,  and  sorely 
injured  paganism,  which  he  feared  far  less  than  Arianism,  and 
thus  frustrated  the  cunning  plan  of  Julian,  the  emjDcror 
resorted  to  violence,  and  banished  him  as  a  dangerous  dis- 
turber of  the  peace.  For  the  fourth  time  Athanasius  left 
Alexandria,  but  calmed  his  weeping  friends  with  the  prophetic 
words:  "Be  of  good  cheer;  it  is  only  a  cloud,  which  will  soon 

Alexander  died  in  328,  not  in  326.     See  particulars  in  Larsow,  1.  c.  p.  26,^and  §  121    1 
above. 


888  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

pass  over."  By  presence  of  mind  he  escaped  from  an  imperial 
ship  on  the  Nile,  which  had  two  hired  assassins  on  board. 
After  Julian's  death  in  362  he  was  again  recalled  by  Jovian. 
But  the  next  emperor  Yalens,  an  Arian,  issued  in  367  an  edict 
which  again  banished  all  the  bishops  who  had  been  deposed 
under  Constantius  and  restored  by  Julian.  The  aged  Athana- 
sius  was  obliged  for  the  fifth  time  to  leave  his  beloved  flock, 
and  kept  himself  concealed  more  than  four  months  in  the  tomb 
of  his  father.  Then  Valens,  boding  ill  from  the  enthusiastic 
adherence  of  the  Alexandrians  to  their  orthodox  bishop, 
repealed  the  edict. 

From  this  time  Athanasius  had  peace,  and  still  wrote,  at  a 
great  age,  with  the  vigor  of  youth,  against  Apollinarianism. 
In  the  year  373  ^  he  died,  after  an  administration  of  nearly 
forty-six  years,  but  before  the  conclusion  of  the  Arian  war. 
He  had  secured  by  his  testimony  the  final  victory  of  ortho- 
doxy, but,  like  Moses,  was  called  away  from  the  earthly  scene 
before  the  goal  was  reached. 

Athanasius,  like  many  great  men  (from  David  and  Paul  to 
Kapoleon  and  Schleiermacher),  was  very  small  of  stature,' 
somewhat  stooping  and  emaciated  by  fasting  and  many 
troubles,  but  fair  of  countenance,  with  a  piercing  eye  and  a 
personal  appearance  of  great  power  even  over  his  enemies.^ 
His  omnipresent  activity,  his  rapid  and  his  mysterious  move- 
ments, his  fearlessness,  and  his  prophetic  insight  into  the  future, 
were  attributed  by  his  friends  to  divine  assistance,  by  his  ene- 
mies to  a  league  with  evil  powers.  Hence  the  belief  in  his 
magic  art.*     His  congregation  in  Alexandi'ia  and  the  people 

'  Opinions  concerning  the  year  of  his  death  waver  between  371  and  373.  As 
lie  was  bishop  forty-six  years,  and  came  to  the  see  in  828  (not  326,  as  formerly  sup- 
posed), he  cannot  have  died  before  a41«*r  373.  r 

^  Julian  called  him   contemptuously  (Ep.   51)   M'jSe   aviip,  aW'  ai'Srpa'w'KXKO^ 

'  Comp.  Gregory  Naz.  in  his  Eulogy. 

*  This  belief  embodied  itself  in  the  Arian  form  of  the  legend  of  St.  George  of 
Cappadocia,  the  Arian  bishop  elected  in  opposition  to  Athanasius,  and  killed  by  the 
populace  in  Alexandria,  in  his  contest  with  the  wizard  Athanasius.  In  this  way 
Arians  revenged  themselves  on  the  memory  of  their  great  adversary.  Afterwards 
the  wizard  became  a  dragon,  whom  George  on  his  horse  overcomes.  According  to 
others,  George  was  a  martyr  under  Diocletian. 


OuJ.  J^dom^  a-  fffunyi  ittJ  .^/1rt^^«-u^  -vwk)  ^^v^  -^^  Co^ 


oi^ea^&v  n>7<i 


-IH' 


<^^^/-^Irt 


W^  c/a.^^  d^jZi,    irr-^9  £^>^-  C  «->»^  '  ^^^-^/  ^  '^r  fT 
<^   .>o<ei^/^  .jfC{C.c^  (^^^Zt.   d^-*^^-^  '^  ^/V»-^^Ht,<.<^ 


§    163.       ATHAiTASIUS   THE   GREAT.  889 

and  monks  of  Egypt  were  attached  to  him  through  all  the 
vicissitudes  of  his  tempestuous  life  with  equal  fidelity  and 
veneration.  Gregory  Nazianzen  begins  his  enthusiastic  pane- 
gyric with  the  words :  "  When  I  praise  Athanasius,  1  praise 
virtue  itself,  because  he  combines  all  virtues  in  himself." 
Constantine  the  Younger  called  him  "the  man  of  God;" 
Theodoret,  "the  great  enlightener;"  and  John  of  Damascus, 
"  the  corner-stone  of  the  church  of  God." 

All  this  is,  indeed,  very  hyperbolical,  after  the  fashion  of 
degenerate  Grecian  rhetoric.  Athanasius  was  not  free  from 
the  faults  of  his  age.  But  he  is,  on  the  whole,  one  of  the 
purest,  most  imposing,  and  most  venerable  personages  in  the 
history  of  the  church ;  and  this  judgment  will  now  be  almost 
universally  accepted.' 

'  The  rationalistic  historian  Heske  (Geschichte  der  christl.  Kirche,  5  th  ed.  1818, 
i.  p.  212)  called  him,  indeed,  a  "haughty  hard-head,"  and  the  "author  of  many 
broils  and  of  the  unhappiness  of  many  thousand  men."  But  the  age  of  the  ration- 
alistic debasement  of  history,  thank  God,  is  past.  Quite  different  is  the  judgment 
of  Gibbon,  who  despised  the  faith  of  Athanasius,  yet  could  not  withhold  from  him 
personally  the  tribute  of  his  admiration.  "  We  have  seldom,"  says  he  in  ch.  xxi.  of 
his  celebrated  work,  "  an  opportunity  of  observing,  either  in  active  or  speculative 
life,  what  effect  may  be  produced,  or  what  obstacles  may  be  surmounted  by  the 
force  of  a  single  mind,  when  it  is  inflexibly  applied  to  the  pursuit  of  a  single  object. 
The  immortal  name  of  Athanasius  will  never  be  separated  from  the  Catholic  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity,  to  whose  defence  he  consecrated  every  moment  and  every  faculty 
of  his  being.  .  .  .  Amidst  the  storms  of  persecution  the  archbishop  of  Alexandria 
was  patient  of  labor,  jealous  of  fame,  careless  of  safety ;  and  although  his  mind  was 
tainted  by  the  contagion  of  fanaticism,  Athanasius  displayed  a  superiority  of  charac- 
ter aud  abilities  which  would  have  qualified  him  far  better  than  the  degenerate  sons 
of  Constantine  for  the  government  of  a  great  monarchy."  Dr.  Baur  thus  charac- 
terizes Athanasius  (Vorlesungen  iiber  die  Dogmengeschichtc,  vol.  i.  ii.  p.  41):  "His 
talent  for  speculative  dogmatic  investigations,  in  which  he  knew  how  to  lay  hold, 
sharply  and  clearly,  of  the  saUent  point  of  the  dogma,  was  as  great  as  the  power 
with  which  he  stood  at  the  head  of  a  party  and  managed  a  theological  controversy. 
.  .  .  The  devotion,  with  which  he  defended  the  cause  of  orthodoxy,  and  the 
importance  of  the  dogma,  which  was  the  subject  of  dispute,  have  made  his  name 
one  of  the  most  venerable  in  the  church.  In  modern  times  he  has  been  frequently 
charged  with  a  passionate  love  for  theological  controversy.  But  the  most  recent 
ecclesiastical  and  doctrinal  historians  are  more  and  more  unanimous  in  according  to 
him  a  pure  zeal  for  Christian  truth,  and  a  profound  sense  for  the  apprehension  of 
the  same.  It  is  a  strong  testimony  for  the  purity  of  his  character  that  his  congrega- 
tion at  Antioch  adhered  to  him  with  tender  affection  to  the  last."/''A.  de  Broglie 
(L'eglise  et  I'empire  remain  au  IV^  siecle,  vol.  ii.  p.  25)  finds  the  principal  quality 


890  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

He  "was  (and  there  are  few  such)  a  theological  and  churchly 
cliaraeter  in  magnificent,  antique  style.  He  was  a  man  of  one 
mould  and  one  idea,  and  in  this  respect  one-sided ;  yet  in  the 
best  sense,  as  the  same  is  true  of  most  great  men  who  are 
borne  along  with  a  mighty  and  comprehensive  thought,  and 
subordinate  all  others  to  it.  So  Paul  lived  and  labored  for 
Christ  crucified,  Gregory  YII.  for  the  Eoman  hierarchy, 
Luther  for  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  Calvin  for  the 
idea  of  the  sovereign  grace  of  God.  It  was  the  passion  and 
the  life-work  of  Athanasius  to  vindicate  the  deity  of  Christ, 
which  he  rightly  regarded  as  the  corner-stone  of  the  edifice  of 
the  Christian  faith,  and  without  which  he  could  conceive  no 
redemption.  For  this  truth  he  spent  all  his  time  and  strength ; 
for  this  he  suffered  deposition  and  twenty  years  of  exile ;  for 
this  he  would  have  been  at  any  moment  glad  to  pour  out  his 
blood.  For  his  vindication  of  this  truth  lie  was  much  hated, 
much  loved,  always  respected  or  feared.  In  the  unwavering 
conviction  that  he  had  the  right  and  the  protection  of  God  on 
his  side,  he  constantly  disdained  to  call  in  the  secular  power 
for  his  ecclesiastical  ends,  and  to  degrade  himself  to  an  im- 
perial courtier,  as  his  antagonists  often  did." 

Against  the  Arians  he  was  infiexible,  because  he  believed 
they  hazarded  the  essence  of  Christianity  itself,  and  he  allowed 
himself  the  most  invidious  and  the  most  contemptuous  terms. 
He  calls  them  polytheists,  atheists,  Jews,  Pharisees,  Saddu- 
cees,  Herodians,  spies,  worse  persecutors  than  the  heathen, 
Hars,  dogs,  wolves,  antichrists,  and  devils.  But  he  confined 
himself  to  spiritual  weapons,  and  never,  like  his  successor 
Cyril  a  century  later,  used  nor  counselled  measures  of  force. 
He  sufi'ered  persecution,  but  did  not  practise  it ;  he  followed 
the  maxim :  Orthodoxy  should  persuade  faith,  not  force  it. 

of  the  mind  of  Athanasius  in  "  un  rare  melange  de  droiture  de  sens  et  dc  subtiUte 
de  raisonnement.  Dans  la  discussion  la  plus  compliquee  rien  ue  lui  echappait,  mais 
rien  ne  I'cbranlait.  II  demelait  toutes  les  nuances  de  la  pensee  de  son  adversaire, 
en  penetrait  tous  les  detours ;  mais  il  ne  perdait  jamais  de  vue  le  point  principal  et 
le  but  du  debat.  .  .  .  Uuissant  les  qualites  des  deux  ecoles,  il  discutait  comme 
un  Grec  et  concluait  nettement  comme  un  Latin.  Cette  combinaison  originale, 
relevee  par  une  indomptable  fermete  de  caractere,  fait  encore  aujourd'hui  le  seul 
merite  qu'  h  distance  nous  puissions  pleinement  apprecier  dans  scs  ecrits." 


§   163.      ATHANASIUS    THE    GEEAT.  891 

Towards  the  unessential  errors  of  good  men,  like  those  of 
Marcellus  of  Ancyra,  he  was  indulgent.  Of  Origen  he  spoke 
with  esteem,  and  with  gratitude  for  his  services,  while  Epipha- 
nius,  and  even  Jerome,  delighted  to  blacken  his  memory  and 
burn  his  bones.  To  the  suspicions  of  the  orthodoxy  of  Basil, 
whom,  by  the  way,  he  never  personally  knew,  he  gave  no  ear, 
but  pronounced  his  liberality  a  justifiable  condescension  to  the 
weak.  When  he  found  himself  compelled  to  write  against 
Apollinaris,  whom  he  esteemed  and  loved,  he  confined  himself 
to  the  refutation  of  his  error,  without  the  mention  of  his  name. 
He  was  more  concerned  for  theological  ideas  than  for  words 
and  formulas ;  even  upon  the  shibboleth  homoousios  he  would 
not  obstinately  insist,  provided  only  the  great  truth  of  the 
essential  and  eternal  Godhead  of  Christ  were  not  sacrificed. 
At  his  last  appearance  in  public,  as  president  of  the  council  of 
Alexandi'ia  in  362,  he  acted  as  mediator  and  reconciler  of  the 
contending  parties,  who,  notwithstanding  all  their  discord  in 
the  use  of  the  terms  ousia  and  hypostasis,  were  one  in  the 
ground-work  of  their  faith. 

]S"o  one  of  all  the  Oriental  fathers  enjoyed  so  high  consid- 
eration in  the  Western  church  as  Athanasius.  His  personal 
sojourn  in  Rome  and  Treves,  and  his  knowledge  of  the  Latin 
tongue,  contiibuted  to  this  effect.  He  transplanted  monasti- 
cism  to  the  West.  But  it  was  his  advocacy  of  the  fundamental 
doctrine  of  Christianity  that,  more  than  all,  gave  him  his  West- 
ern reputation.  Under  his  name  the  Symbolum  Quicunque, 
of  much  later,  and  probably  of  French,  origin,  has  found  uni- 
versal acceptance  in  the  Latin  church,  and  has  maintained 
itself  to  this  day  in  living  use.  His  name  is  inseparable  from 
the  conflicts  and  the  triumph  of  the  doctrine  of  the  holy 
Trmity. 

As  an  author,  Athanasius  is  distmguished  for  theological 
depth  and  discrimination,  for  dialectical  skill,  and  sometimes 
for  fulminating  eloquence.  He  everywhere  evinces  a  trium- 
phant intellectual  superiority  over  his  antagonists,  and  shows 
himself  a  veritable  malleus  hcBreticorum.  He  pursues  them 
into  all  their  hiding-places,  and  refutes  all  their  arguments  and 
their  sophisms,  but  never  loses  sight  of  the  main  point  of  the 


892  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

controversj,  to  which  he  ever  returns  with  renewed  force. 
His  views  are  governed  by  a  strict  logical  connection ;  but 
his  stormy  fortunes  prevented  him  from  composing  a  large 
systematic  work.  Almost  all  his  writings  are  occasional, 
wrung  from  him  by  circumstances ;  not  a  few  of  them  were 
hastily  written  in  exile. 

They  may  be  divided  as  follows : 

1.  Apologetic  works  in  defence  of  Christianity.  Among 
these  are  the  two  able  and  enthusiastic  kindred  productions  of 
his  youth  (composed  before  325) :  "  A  Discourse  against  the 
Greeks,"  and  "  On  the  Incarnation  of  the  Divine  "Word," '  • 
which  he  abeady  looked  upon  as  the  central  idea  of  the 
Christian  religion. 

2.  Dogmatic  and  cokteoveksial  works  in  defence  of  the 
Nicene  faith ;  which  are  at  the  same  time  very  important  to 
the  history  of  the  Arian  controversies.  Of  these  the  following 
are  dhected  against  Arianism :  An  Encyclical  Letter  to  all 
Bishops  (written  in  341) ;  On  the  Decrees  of  the  Council  of 
Nicsea  (352) ;  On  the  Opinion  of  Dionysius  of  Alexandria 
(352) ;  An  Epistle  to  the  Bishops  of  Egypt  and  Libya  (356) ; 
four  Orations  against  the  Arians  (358) ;  A  Letter  to  Serapion 
on  the  Death  of  Arius  (358  or  359) ;  A  History  of  the  Arians 
to  the  Monks  (between  358  and  360).  To  these  are  to  be 
added  four  Epistles  to  Serapion  on  the  Deity  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  (358),  and  two  books  Against  Apollinaris,  in  defence  of 
the  full  humanity  of  Christ  (379). 

3.  "Works  in  his  own  peesonal  defence:  An  Apology 
against  the  Arians  (350) ;  an  Apology  to  Constantius  (356) ; 
an  Apology  concerning  his  Flight  (De  fuga,  357  or  358) ;  and 
several  letters. 

4.  Exegetical  works;  especially  a  Commentary  on  the 
Psalms,  in  which  he  everywhere  finds  types  and  prophecies  of 
Christ  and  the  church,  according  to  the  extravagant  allegoriz- 

'  Ao'yos  Kara  ''E.Wiivaiv  (or  Contra  Gentes),  and  Ylepl  tt)s  evav^pcont'jirecus  rod 
\6yov.  in  the  first  volume,  Part  1,  of  the  Bened.  ed.  pp.  l-Q*?.  The  latter  tract  (De 
incarnationc  Verbi  Dei)  against  unbelievers  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  the  tract 
written  much  later  (a.  d.  364),  and  by  some  considered  spurious :  De  incamatione 
Dei  Verbi  ct  contra  Arianos,  tom.  i.  Pars  ii.  pp.  871-890. 


§   164.      BASIL   THE   GKEAT.  893 

ing  method  of  the  Alexandrian  school ;  and  a  synopsis  or  com- 
pendium of  the  Bible.  But  the  genuineness  of  these  unim- 
portant works  is  by  many  doubted.' 

5.  Ascetic  and  Pkactical  works.  Chief  among  these  are  his 
"  Life  of  St.  Anthony,"  composed  about  365,  or  at  all  events 
after  the  death  of  Anthony,"  and  his  "  Festal  Letters,"  which 
have  but  recently  become  known .^  The  Festal  Letters  give 
us  a  glimpse  of  his  pastoral  fidelity  as  bishop,  and  throw  new 
light  also  on  many  of  his  doctrines,  and  on  the  condition  of 
the  church  in  his  time.  In  these  letters  Athanasius,  according 
to  Alexandrian  custom,  announced  annually,  at  Epiphany,  to 
the  clergy  and  congregations  of  Egypt,  the  time  of  the  next 
Easter,  and  added  edifying  observations  on  passages  of  Scrip- 
ture, and  timely  exhortations.  These  were  read  in  the 
churches,  during  the  Easter  season,  es23ecially  on  Palm-Sun- 
day. As  Athanasius  was  bishop  forty-five  years,  he  would 
have  written  that  number  of  Festal  Letters,  if  he  had  not  been 
several  times  prevented  by  flight  or  sickness.  The  letters 
were  written  in  Greek,  but  soon  translated  into  Syriac,  and 
lay  buried  for  centm'ies  in  the  dust  of  a  Nitrian  cloister,  till 
the  research  of  Protestant  scholarship  brought  them  again  to 
the  light. 

§  164.    Basil  the  Great. 

I.  S.  Basilius  Oa3s.  Cappad.  archiepisc. :  Opera  omnia  qu£e  esstant  vel  quse 
ejus  nomine  circumferuntur,  Gr.  et  Lat.  ed.  Jul.  Gamier,  presbyter 
and  monk  of  the  Bened.  order.  Paris,  1721-30.  3  vols.  fol.  Eadem 
ed.  Parisina  altera,  emendata  et  aucta  a  Lud.  de  Sinner,  Par.  (Gaurae 
Fratres)  1839,  3  tomi  in  6  Partes  (an  elegant  and  convenient  ed.). 
Reprinted  also  by  Migne,  Par.  1857,  in  4  vols,  (Patrol.  Gr,  tom.  xxix,- 
xsxii.).  The  first  edition  of  St.  Basil  was  superintended  by  Erasmus 
with  Froben  in  Basle,  1532,  Comp.  also  Opera  Bas.  dogmatica  selecta 
in  Thilo's  Bibl,  Patr.  Gr,  dogm.  vol.  ii.  Lips.  1854  (under  care  of  J,  D. 

^  Comp.  the  arguments  on  both  sides  in  the  Opera,  tom.  ii.  p.  1004  sqq.  and  tom, 

iii.  p.  124  sqq. 

^  Opera,  tom,  ii,  (properly  tom.  i.  Pars  ii.),  pp.  785-866.     Comp.  above,  §  35, 
^  Comp.  the  cited  editions  of  the  Festal  Letters  by  Cureton,  Larsow,  and  Angelo 

Mai. 


894  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

H.  Goldhorn,  and  containing  the  Libri  iii.  adversus  Eunomium,  and 
Liber  i.  de  Spiritu  Sancto). 
II.  Ancient  accounts  and  descriptions  of  Basil  in  the  faneral  discourses  and 
eulogies  of  Gregoey  Naz.  (Oratio  xliii.),  Geegoey  Ntss.,  Amphilo- 
OHitrs,  Ephe^m  Syetjs.  Gaenier  :  Vita  S.  Basilii,  in  his  edition  of 
the  Opera,  torn.  iii.  pp.  xxxviii.-ccliv.  (in  the  new  Paris  ed,  of  1839 ; 
or  torn.  1.  in  Migne's  reprint).  Oomp.  also  the  Vitse  in  the  Acta 
Sanctoeum,  sub  Jan.  14,  by  Heemant,  Tillemont  (torn,  ix.),  Fabei- 
;^*K  u  5^v  ^f^  ^^i  ^^^^  (Bibl.  torn,  ix.),  Gave,  Pfeiffee,  Soheceokh  (Part  xiii.  pp.  3-220), 
Boheingee,  <Hid"  W.  Klose  (Basilius  der  Grosse  nach  seinem  Leben 
und  seiner  Lehre,  Stralsund,  1835),  :i,,i^  ^"tctXc-J^.  (^  ^/aULl^ 

The  Asiatic  province  of  Caj)padocia  produced  in  tlie  fourth 
century  the  three  distinguished  church  teachers,  Basil  and  the 
two  Gregories,  who  stand  in  strong  contrast  with  the  general 
character  of  their  countrymen ;  for  the  Cappadocians  are 
described  as  a  cowardly,  servile,  and  deceitful  race.' 

Basil  was  born  about  the  year  329,'*  at  Csesarea,  the  capital 
of  Capj)adocia,  in  the  bosom  of  a  wealthy  and  pious  family, 
whose  ancestors  had  distinguished  themselves  as  martyrs. 
The  seed  of  piety  had  been  planted  in  him  by  his  grandmother, 
St.  Macrina,  and  his  mother,  St.  Emmelia.  He  had  four 
brothers  and  five  sisters,  who  all  led  a  religious  life ;  two  of 
his  brothers,  Gregory,  bishop  of  llTyssa,  and  Peter,  bishop  of 
Sebaste,  and  his  sister,  Macrina  the  Younger,  are,  like  himself, 
among  the  saints  of  the  Eastern  church.  He  received  his  lit- 
erary education  at  first  from  his  father,  who  was  a  rhetorician ; 
afterwards  at  school  in  Constantinople  (347),  where  he  enjoyed 
the  instruction  and  personal  esteem  of  the  celebrated  Libanius ; 
and  in  Athens,  where  he  spent  several  years,  between  351  and 
355,"  studying  rhetoric,  mathematics,  and  philosophy,  in  com- 
pany with  his  intimate  friend  Gregory  Kazianzen,  and  at  the 
same  time  with  prince  Julian  the  Apostate. 

'  Particularly  in  the  Letters  of  Isidore  of  Pelusium,  who  flourished  in  the  be 
ginning  of  the  fifth  century.  Gregory  Nazianzcn  gives  a  more  favorable  picture  of 
the  Cappadocians,  and  boasts  of  their  orthodoxy,  which,  however,  might  easily  be 
united  with  the  faults  above  mentioned,  especially  in  the  East. 

"^  According  to  Gamier;  comp.  his  Vita  Bas.  c.  1,  §  2.  Fabricius  puts  the  birth 
erroneously  into  the  year  316. 

^  On  the  time  of  his  residence  in  Athens,  see  Tillemont  and  Gamier. 


§   164.      BASIL   THE   GKEAT,  895 

Athens,  partly  through  its  ancient  renown  and  its  historical 
traditions,  partly  by  excellent  teachers  of  philosophy  and  elo- 
quence. Sophists,  as  they  were  called  in  an  honorable  sense, 
among  whom  Himerius  and  Proseresius  were  at  that  time 
specially  conspicuous,  was  still  drawing  a  multitude  of  students 
from  all  quarters  of  Greece,  and  even  from  the  remote  prov- 
inces of  Asia.  Every  Sophist  had  his  own  school  and  party, 
which  was  attached  to  him  with  incredible  zeal,  and  endeav- 
ored to  gain  every  newly  arriving  student  to  its  master.  In 
these  efforts,  as  well  as  in  the  frequent  literary  contests  and 
debates  of  the  various  schools  among  themselves,  there  was  not 
seldom  much  rude  and  wild  behavior.  To  youth  who  were 
not  yet  firmly  grounded  in  Christianity,  residence  in  Athens, 
and  occuj)ation  with  the  ancient  classics,  were  full  of  tempta- 
tion, and  might  easily  kindle  an  enthusiasm  for  heathenism, 
which,  however,  had  already  lost  its  vitality,  and  was  upheld 
solely  by  the  artificial  means  of  magic,  ''heurgy,  and  an  obscure 
mysticism.' 

Basil  and  Gregory  remained  steadfast,  and  no  poetical  or 
rhetorical  glitter  could  fade  the  impressions  of  a  pious  training. 
Gregory  says  of  their  studies  in  Athens,  in  his  forty-third  Ora- 
tion :  ^  ''  "We  knew  only  two  streets  of  the  city,  the  first  and 
the  more  excellent  one  to  the  churches,  and  to  the  ministers 
of  the  altar ;  the  other,  which,  however,  we  did  not  so  highly 
esteem,  to  the  public  schools  and  to  the  teachers  of  the 
sciences.  The  streets  to  the  theatres,  games,  and  places  of 
unlioly  amusements,  we  left  to  others.  Our  holiness  was  our 
great  concern ;  our  sole  aim  was  to  be  called  and  to  be  Chris- 
tians. In  this  we  placed  our  whole  glory."  ^  In  a  later  ora- 
tion on  classic  studies  Basil  encourages  them,  but  admonishes 
that  they  should  be  pursued  with  caution,  and  with  constant 
regard  to  the  great  Christian  purpose  of  eternal  life,  to  which 
all  earthly  objects  and  attainments  are  as  shadows  and  dreams 

'  On  this  Athenian  student -Hfe  of  that  day  see  especially  the  43d,  ch.  14  sqq.  (in 
older  editions  the  20th)  Oration  of  Gregory  Nazianzcn,  and  Libauius,  De  vita  sua, 
p.  13,  ed.  Reiske. 

"  The  Oratio  funebris  in  laudem  Basilii  M.  c.  21  (Opera,  ed.  Migne,  ii.  p.  523). 
'Ufuir  5e  rb  fniya  npuyfxa  Koi  ofo/xa,  Xpianai'ovs  Kcd  dvai  Kul  bfo/xdi^ia^ai. 


896  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D,    311-590. 

to  reality.  In  plucking  the  rose  one  should  beware  of  the 
thorns,  and,  like  the  bee,  should  not  only  delight  himself  with 
the  color  and  the  fragrance,  but  also  gain  useful  honey  from 
the  flower.* 

The  intimate  friendship  of  Basil  and  Gregory,  lasting  from 
fresh,  enthusiastic  youth  till  death,  resting  on  an  identity  of 
spiritual  and  moral  aims,  and  sanctified  by  Christian  piety,  is  a 
lovely  and  engaging  chapter  in  the  history  of  the  fathers,  and 
justifies  a  brief  episode  in  a  field  not  yet  entered  by  any 
church  historian. 

With  all  the  ascetic  narrowness  of  the  time,  which  fettered 
even  these  enlightened  fathers,  they  still  had  minds  susceptible 
to  science  and  art  and  the  heauties  of  nature.  In  the  works  of 
Basil  and  of  the  two  Gregories  occur  pictures  of  nature  such 
as  we  seek  in  vain  in  the  heathen  classics.  The  descriptions 
of  natural  scenery  among  theupoets  and  philosophers  of  ancient 
Greece  and  Rome  can  be  easily  compressed  within  a  few  pages. 
Socrates,  as  we  learn  from  Plato,  was  of  the  opinion  that  we 
can  leani  nothing  from  trees  and  fields,  and  hence  he  never 
took  a  walk ;  he  was  so  bent  upon  self-knowledge,  as  the  tnie 
aim  of  all  learning,  that  he  regarded  the  whole  study  of  nature 
as  useless,  because  it  did  not  tend  to  make  man  either  more 
intelligent  or  more  virtuous.  The  deeper  sense  of  the  beauty 
of  natui'e  is  awakened  by  the  religion  of  revelation  alone, 
which  teaches  us  to  see  everywhere  in  creation  the  traces  of 
the  power,  the  wisdom,  and  the  goodness  of  God.  The  book 
of  Ruth,  the  book  of  Job,  many  Psalms,  particularly  the  lOith, 
and  the  parables,  are  without  parallel  in  Grecian  or  Roman 
literature.  The  renowned  naturalist,  Alexander  von  Hima- 
boldt,  collected  some  of  the  most  beautiful  descrijDtions  of 
nature  fi'om  the  fathers  for  his  purposes.'     They  are  an  inter- 

'  Oratio  ad  adolescentes,  quomodo  possint  ex  gentilium  libris  fructum  capere  ? 
or  more  simply,  De  legendis  libris  gentilium  (in  Garnier's  ed.  torn.  ii.  P.  i.  pp.  243- 
259).  This  famous  oration,  which  helped  to  preserve  at  least  some  regard  for  clas- 
sical studies  in  the  middle  age,  has  been  several  times  edited  separately ;  as  by 
Hugo  Grotius  (with  a  new  Latin  translation  and  Prolegomena),  1623  ;  Joh.  Potter, 
1694;  J.  H.  Majus,  1714;  &c. 

'  In  the  second  volume  of  his  Kosmos,  Stuttgart  and  Tiibingen,  1847,  p.  27  ff. 
Humboldt  justly  observes,  p.  26 :    "  The  tendency  of  Christian  sentiment  was,  to 


§   164.      BASIL   THE   GEEAT.  897 

esting  proof  of  the  transfiguring  power  of  the  spirit  of  Chris- 
tianity even  upon  our  views  of  nature. 

A  breath  of  sweet  sadness  runs  through  them,  which  is 
entirely  foreign  to  classical  antiquity.  This  is  especially 
manifest  in  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  the  brother  of  Basil.  "  "When 
I  see,"  says  he,  for  example,  "  every  rocky  ridge,  every  valley, 
every  plain,  covered  with  new-grown  grass;  and  then  the 
variegated  beauty  of  the  trees,  and  at  my  feet  the  lilies  doubly 
enriched  by  nature  with  sweet  odors  and  gorgeous  colors; 
when  I  view  in  the  distance  the  sea,  to  which  the  changing 
cloud  leads  out — my  soul  is  seized  with  sadness  which  is  not 
without  delight.  And  when  in  autumn  fruits  disappear,  leaves 
fall,  boughs  stiffen,  stripped  of  their  beauteous  di'ess — we  sink 
with  the  perpetual  and  regular  vicissitude  into  the  harmony 
of  wonder-working  nature.  He  who  looks  through  this  with 
the  thoughtful  eye  of  the  soul,  feels  the  littleness  of  man  in 
the  greatness  of  the  universe."  '  Yet  we  find  sunny  pictures 
also,  like  the  beautiful  description  of  spring  in  an  oration  of 
Gregory  Nazianzen  on  the  martyr  Mamas.^ 

A  second  characteristic  of  these  representations  of  nature, 
and  for  the  church  historian  the  most  important,  is  the  refer- 
ence of  earthly  beauty  to  an  eternal  and  heavenly  principle, 
and  that  glorification  of  God  in  the  works  of  creation,  which 
transplanted  itself  from  the  Psalms  and  the  book  of  Job  into 
the  Christian  church.  In  his  homiKes  on  the  history  of  the 
Creation,  Basil  describes  the  mildness  of  the  serene  nights  in 
Asia  Minor,  where  the  stars,  "  the  eternal  flowers  of  heaven, 
raised  the  spirit  of  man  from  the  visible  to  the  invisible."  In 
the  oration  just  mentioned,  after  describing  the  spring  in  the 

prove  from  the  universal  order  and  from  the  beauty  of  nature  the  greatness  and 
goodness  of  the  Creator.  Such  a  tendency,  to  glorify  the  Deity  from  His  works, 
occasioned  a  prepension  to  descriptions  of  nature."  The  earliest  and  largest  picture 
of  this  kind  he  finds  in  the  apologetic  writer,  Minucius  FeHx.  Then  he  draws  sev- 
eral examples  from  Basil  (for  whom  he  confesses  he  had  "  long  entertained  a  special 
predilection"),  Epist.  xiv.  and  Epist.  ccxxiii.  (torn.  iii.  ed.  Garnier),  from  Gregory 
of  Nyssa,  and  from  Chrysostom. 

'  From  several  fragments  of  Gregory  of  Nyssa  combined  and  translated  (into 
German)  by  Humboldt,  1.  c.  p.  29  f. 

^  See  UUmann's  Gregor  von  Nazianz,  p.  210  ff. 
VOL.  II. — 57 


898  THIRD   PERIOD.   A.D.    311-590. 

most  lovely  and  life-like  colors,  Gregory  Nazianzen  proceeds : 
"  Everything  praises  God  and  glorifies  Him  with  nniitterable 
tones ;  for  everything  shall  thanks  be  offered  also  to  God  by 
me,  and  thus  shall  the  song  of  those  creatures,  whose  song  of 
praise  I  here  utter,  be  also  ours.  .  .  .  Indeed  it  is  now 
[alluding  to  the  Easter  festival]  the  spring-time  of  the  world, 
the  spring-time  of  the  spirit,  spring-time  for  souls,  spring-time 
for  bodies,  a  visible  spring,  an  invisible  spring,  in  which  we 
also  shall  there  have  part,  if  we  here  be  rightly  transformed, 
and  enter  as  new  men  upon  a  new  life."  Thus  the  earth 
becomes  a  vestibule  of  heaven,  the  beauty  of  the  body  is  con- 
secrated an  image  of  the  beauty  of  the  spirit. 

The  Greek  fathers  placed  the  beauty  of  nature  above  the 
works  of  art,  having  a  certain  prejudice  against  art  on  account 
of  the  heathen  abuses  of  it.  "  If  thou  seest  a  splendid  build- 
ing, and  the  view  of  its  colonnades  would  transport  thee,  look 
quickly  at  the  vault  of  the  heavens  and  the  open  fields,  on 
which  the  flocks  are  feeding  on  the  shore  of  the  sea.  "Who 
does  not  despise  every  creation  of  art,  when  in  the  silence  of 
the  heart  he  early  wonders  at  the  rising  sun,  as  it  pours  its 
golden  (crocus-yellow)  light  over  the  horizon  ?  when,  resting  at 
a  spring  in  the  deep  grass  or  under  the  dark  shade  of  thick 
trees,  he  feeds  his  eye  upon  the  dim  vanishing  distance  ?  "  So 
Chrysostom  exclaims  from  his  monastic  solitude  near  Antioch, 
and  Humboldt '  adds  the  ingenious  remark  :  "  It  was  as  if  elo- 
quence had  found  its  element,  its  freedom,  again  at  the  foim- 
tain  of  nature  in  the  then  wooded  mountain  regions  of  Syria 
and  Asia  Minor." 

In  the  rough  times  of  the  first  introduction  of  Christianity 
among  the  Celtic  and  Germanic  tribes,  who  had  worshipped 
the  dismal  powers  of  nature  in  rude  symbols,  an  opposition  to 
intercourse  with  nature  apjDcared,  like  that  which  we  find  in 
Tertullian  to  pagan  art ;  and  church  assemblies  of  the  twelfth 
and  thirteenth  centuries,  at  Tours  (11G3)  and  at  Paris  (1209), 
forbid  the  monks  the  sinful  reading  of  books  on  nature,  till  the 
renowned  scholastics,  Albert  the  Great  (f  1280),  and  the  gifted 

'  L.  c.  p.  30. 


§   164,      BASIL   THE   GREAT.  899 

Eoger  Bacon  (f  1294),  penetrated  the  mysteries  of  natm-e  and 
raised  tlie  study  of  it  again  to  consideration  and  honor. 

We  now  return  to  the  life  of  Basil.  After  finishing  his 
studies  in  Athens  he  appeared  in  his  native  city  of  Caesarea  as 
a  rhetorician.  But  he  soon  after  (a.  d.  360)  took  a  journey  to 
Syria,  Palestine,  and  Egypt,  to  become  acquainted  with  the 
monastic  life ;  and  he  became  more  and  more  enthusiastic  for 
it.  He  distributed  his  property  to  the  poor,  and  withdrew  to 
a  lonely  romantic  district  in  Pontus,  near  the  cloister  in  which 
his  mother  Emmelia,  with  his  sister  Macrina,  and  other  pious 
and  cultivated  virgins,  were  living.  "  God  has  shown  me,"' 
he  wrote  to  his  friend  Gregory,  "  a  region  which  exactly  suits 
my  mode  of  life;  it  is,  in  truth,  what  in  our  happy  jestings  we 
often  wished.  What  imagination  showed  us  in  the  distance,  that 
I  now  see  before  me.  A  high  mountain,  covered  with  thick 
forest,  is  watered  towards  the  north  by  fresh  perennial  streams. 
At  the  foot  of  the  mountain  a  wide  plain  spreads  out,  made 
fruitful  by  the  vapors  which  moisten  it.  The  sm-rounding 
forest,  in  which  many  varieties  of  trees  crowd  together,  shuts 
me  off  like  a  strong  castle.  The  wilderness  is  bounded  by  two 
deep  ravines.  On  one  side  the  stream,  where  it  rushes  foam- 
ing down  from  the  mountain,  forms  a  barrier  hard  to  cross ; 
on  the  other  a  broad  ridge  obstructs  approach.  My  hut  is  so 
placed  upon  the  summit,  that  I  overlook  the  broad  plain,  as 
well  as  the  whole  course  of  the  Iris,  which  is  more  beautiful 
and  copious  than  the  Strymon  near  Amphipolis.  The  river 
of  my  wilderness,  more  rapid  than  any  other  that  I  know, 
breaks  upon  the  wall  of  projecting  rock,  and  rolls  foaming  into 
the  abyss :  to  the  mountain  traveller,  a  charming,  wonderful 
sight;  to  the  natives,  profitable  for  its  abundant  fisheries. 
Shall  I  describe  to  you  the  fertilizing  vapors  which  rise  from 
the  (moistened)  earth,  the  cool  air  which  rises  from  the  (mov- 
ing) mirror  of  the  water?  Shall  I  tell  of  the  lovely  singing 
of  the  birds  and  the  richness  of  blooming  plants  ?  What  de- 
lights me  above  all  is  the  silent  repose  of  the  place.  It  is  only 
now  and  then  visited  by  huntsmen ;  for  my  wilderness  nour- 
ishes deer  and  herds  of  wild  goats,  not  your  bears  and  your 
wolves.     How  would  I  exchange  a  place  with  him?     Ale- 


900  THLRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

mseon,  after  he  had  found  the  Echinades,  wished  to  wander  no 
further." ' 

This  romantic  picture  shows  that  the  monastic  life  had  its 
ideal  and  poetic  side  for  cultivated  minds.  In  this  region 
Basil,  free  from  all  cares,  distractions,  and  interruptions  of 
worldly  life,  thought  that  he  could  best  serve  God.  "  What 
is  more  blessed  than  to  imitate  on  earth  the  choir  of  angels,  at 
break  of  day  to  rise  to  prayer,  and  praise  the  Creator  with 
anthems  and  songs ;  then  go  to  labor  in  the  clear  radiance  of 
the  sun,  accompanied  everywhere  by  prayer,  seasoning  work 
with  praise,  as  if  with  salt  ?  Silent  solitude  is  the  beginning 
of  j)urification  of  the  soul.  For  the  mind,  if  it  be  not  disturbed 
fi'om  without,  and  do  not  lose  itself  through  the  senses  in  the 
world,  withdraws  into  itself,  and  rises  to  thoughts  of  God." 
In  the  Scriptures  he  found,  "  as  in  a  store  of  all  medicines,  the 
true  remedy  for  his  sickness." 

Nevertheless,  he  had  also  to  find  that  flight  from  the  city 
was  not  flight  from  his  own  self.  "  I  have  well  forsaken,"  says 
he  in  his  second  Epistle,^  "  my  residence  in  the  city  as  a  source 
of  a  thousand  evils,  hut  I  have  not  teen  able  to  forsake  myself. 
I  am  like  a  man  who,  unaccustomed  to  the  sea,  becomes  sea- 
sick, and  gets  out  of  the  large  ship,  because  it  rocks  more,  into 
a  small  skiff,  but  still  even  there  keeps  the  dizziness  and 
nausea.  So  is  it  with  me ;  for  while  I  carry  about  with  me 
the  passions  which  dwell  in  me,  I  am  everywhere  tormented 
with  the  same  restlessness,  so  that  I  really  get  not  much  help 
from  this  solitude."  In  the  sequel  of  the  letter,  and  elsewhere, 
he  endeavors,  however,  to  show  that  seclusion  from  worldly 
business,  celibacy,  solitude,  perpetual  occupation  with  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  and  with  the  life  of  godly  men,  prayer  and  contem- 
plation, and  a  corresponding  ascetic  severity  of  outward  life, 
are  necessary  for  taming  the  wild  passions,  and  for  attaining 
the  true  quietness  of  the  soul. 

'  Ep.  xiv.  TpTTyopi(f>  kraipta  (torn.  iii.  p.  132,  ed.  nova  Paris.  Garn.),  elegantly 
reproduced  in  German  by  Humboldt,  1.  c.  p.  28,  with  the  observation:  "In  this 
.simple  description  of  landscape  and  of  forest-life,  sentiments  are  expressed  which 
more  intimately  blend  with  those  of  modern  times,  than  anything  that  has  come 
down  to  us  from  Greek  or  Roman  antiquity." 

^  Addressed  to  his  friend  Gregory,  Ep.  ii.  c.  1  (tom.  iii.  p.  100). 


§   164.      BASIL   THE   GREAT.  901 

He  succeeded  in  drawing  his  friend  Gregory  to  himself. 
Together  they  prosecuted  their  prayer,  studies,  and  manual 
labor ;  made  extracts  from  the  works  of  Origen,  which  we 
possess,  under  the  name  of  Philocalia,  as  the  joint  work  of  the 
two  friends;  and  wrote  monastic  rules  which  contributed 
largely  to  extend  and  regulate  the  coenobite  life. 

In  the  year  364  Basil  was  made  presbyter  against  his  will, 
and  in  370,  with  the  co-operation  of  Gregory  and  his  father, 
was  elected  bishop  of  Csesarea  and  metropolitan  of  all  Cappa- 
docia.  In  this  capacity  he  had  fifty  country  bishops  under 
him,  and  devoted  himself  thenceforth  to  the  direction  of  the 
church  and  the  fighting  of  Arianism,  which  had  again  come 
into  power  through  the  emperor  Yalens  in  the  East,  He 
endeavored  to  secure  to  the  catholic  faith  the  victory,  first  by 
close  connection  with  the  orthodox  West,  and  then  by  a  cer- 
tain liberality  in  accepting  as  suflicient,  in  regard  to  the  not 
yet  symbolically  settled  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  the 
Spirit  should'  not  be  considered  a  creature.  But  the  strict 
orthodox  party,  especially  the  monks,  demanded  the  express 
acknowledgment  of  the  divinity  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  vio- 
lently opposed  Basil.  The  Arians  pressed  him  still  more. 
The  emperor  wished  to  reduce  Cappadocia  to  the  heresy,  and 
threatened  the  bishop  by  his  prefects  with  confiscation,  banish- 
ment, and  death.  Basil  replied :  "  ISTothing  more  ?  Not  one  of 
these  things  touches  me.  His  property  cannot  be  forfeited, 
who  has  none ;  banishment  I  know  not,  for  I  am  restricted 
to  no  place,  and  am  the  guest  of  God,  to  whom  the  whole 
earth  belongs  ;  for  martyrdom  I  am  unfit,  but  death  is  a 
benefactor  to  me,  for  it  sends  me  more  quickly  to  God, 
to  w^hom  I  live  and  move;  I  am  also  in  great  part  already 
dead,  and  have  been  for  a  long  time  hastening  to  the 
grave." 

The  emperor  was  about  to  banish  him,  when  his  son,  six 
years  of  age,  was  suddenly  taken  sick,  and  the  physicians  gave 
up  all  hope.  Then  he  sent  for  Basil,  and  his  son  recovered, 
though  he  died  soon  after.  Tlie  imperial  prefect  also  recov- 
ered from  a  sickness,  and  ascribed  his  recovery  to  the  prayer 
of  the  bishop,  towards  whom  he  had  previously  behaved 


902  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

haughtily.  Thus  this  danger  was  averted  by  special  divine 
assistance. 

But  other  difficulties,  perplexities,  and  divisions,  continually 
met  him,  to  obstruct  the  attainment  of  his  desire,  the  restora- 
tion of  the  peace  of  the  church.  These  storms,  and  all  sorts  of 
hostilities,  early  wasted  his  body.  He  died  in  379,  two  years 
before  the  final  victory  of  the  Nicene  orthodoxy,  with  the 
words :  "  Into  Thy  hands,  O  Lord  I  commit  my  spirit ;  Thou 
hast  redeemed  me,  O  Lord,  God  of  truth."  '  He  was  borne  to 
the  gTave  by  a  deeply  sorrowing  multitude. 

Basil  was  poor,  and  almost  always  sickly ;  he  had  only  a 
single  worn-out  garaient,  and  ate  almost  nothing  but  bread, 
salt,  and  herbs.  The  care  of  the  poor  and  sick  he  took  largely 
upon  himself.  He  founded  in  the  vicinity  of  C^sarea  that 
magnificent  hospital,  Basilias,  which  we  have  already  men- 
tioned, chiefly  for  lepers,  who  were  often  entirely  abandoned 
in  those  regions,  and  left  to  the  saddest  fate ;  he  himself  took 
in  the  sufi'erers,  treated  them  as  brethren,  and,  in  spite  of  their 
revolting  condition,  was  not  afraid  to  kiss  them.'' 

Basil  is  distinguished  as  a  pulpit  orator  and  as  a  theologian, 
and  still  more  as  a  shepherd  of  souls  and  a  church  ruler;  and 
in  the  history  of  monasticism  he  holds  a  conspicuous  place.' 
In  classical  culture  he  yields  to  none  of  his  contemporaries, 
and  is  justly  placed  with  the  two  Gregories  among  the  very 
first  writers  among  the  Greek  fathers.  His  style  is  pure, 
elegant,  and  vigorous.  Photius  thought  that  one  who  wished 
to  become  a  panegyrist,  need  take  neither  Demosthenes  nor 
Cicero  for  his  model,  but  Basil  only. 

Of  his  works,  his  Five  Books  against  Eunomius,  written 
in  361,  in  defence  of  the  deity  of  Christ,  and  his  work  on  the 
Holy  Ghost,  written  in  375,  at  the  request  of  his  friend  Am- 
philochius,  are  important  to  the  history  of  doctrine.*     He  at 

'  With  this  prayer  of  Darid,  Ps.  xxxi.  5,  Luther  also  took  leave  of  the  world. 

'  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  xliii.  63,  p.  817  sq. 

"'  K.  Hase  (§  102)  thus  briefly  and  concisely  characterizes  him :  "  An  admirer  of 
Libanius  and  St.  Anthony,  as  zealous  for  science  as  for  monkery,  greatest  in  church 
government." 

*  The  former  in  torn,  i.,  the  latter  in  torn,  iii.,  ed.  Garnier.  Both  are  incorporated 
in  Thilo's  Bibhotheca  Patr.  Grrec.  dog-m.  torn.  ii. 


§   165.      GKEGOKT   OF   NYSSA.  903 

first,  from  fear  of  Sabellianism,  recoiled  from  the  strong  doc- 
trine of  the  homoousia  ^  but  the  j)erseciition  of  the  Arians 
di'ove  him  to  a  decided  confession.  Of  importance  in  the  East 
is  the  Liturgy  ascribed  to  him,  which,  with  that  of  St.  Chrysos- 
tom,  is  still  in  use,  but  has  undoubtedly  reached  its  present 
form  by  degrees.  We  have  also  from  St.  Basil  nine  Homilies 
on  the  history  of  the  Creation,  which  are  full  of  allegorical 
fancies,  but  enjoyed  the  highest  esteem  in  the  ancient  church, 
and  were  extensively  used  by  Ambrose  and  somewhat  by  Augus- 
tine, in  similar  works ; '  Homilies  on  the  Psalms ;  Homilies  on 
various  subjects ;  several  ascetic  and  moral  treatises ; '  and 
three  hundred  and  sixty-five  Epistles,"  which  furnish  much 
information  concemino:  his  life  and  times. 


§  165.     Gregory  of  N'yssa. 

I.  S.  Geegoeius  Ntssexus  :  Opera  omnia,  quse  reperiri  potuerunt,  Gr.  et 
Lat.,  nunc  primum  e  mss.  codd.  edita,  stud.  Front.  Ducmi  (Fronto  le 
Due,  a  learned  Jesuit).  Paris,  1615,  2  vols.  fol.  To  be  added  to 
this.  Appendix  Gregorii  ex  ed.  Jac.Gretseri^  Par.  1618,  fol.;  and  the 
Antirrhetoricus  adv.  Apollinar.,  first  edited  by  L.  Al.  Zacag)ii,  Col- 
lectanea monum.  vet.  eccl.  Grsec.  et  Lat.  Eom.  1698,  and  in  Gallandi, 
Bibliotheca,  torn.  vi.  Later  editions  of  the  Opera  by  ^g.  Morel,  Par. 
1638,  3  vols.  fol.  ("  moins  belle  que  celle  de  1615,  mais  plus  ample  et 
plus  commode  .  .  .  peu  correcte,"  according  to  Brunet) ;  by  Migne, 
Petit-Montrouge  (Par.),  1858,  3  vols. ;  and  by  Franc.  Oeliler,  Halis 
Saxonum,  1865  sqq.  (Tom.  1.  continens  libros  dogmaticos,  but  only 
in  the  Greek  original.)  Oehler  has  also  commenced  an  edition  of  select 
treatises  of  Gregory  of  Nyssa  in  the  original  with  a  German  version. 
The  Benedictines  of  St.  Maur  had  prepared  the  critical  apparatus  for 
an  edition  of  Gregory,  but  it  was  scattered  during  the  French  Eevolu- 
tion.  Angela  Mai,  in  the  Nov.  Patrum  Biblioth.  torn.  iv.  Pars  i.  pp. 
1-53  (Rom.  1847),  has  edited  a  few  writings  of  Gregory  unknown 
before,  viz.,  a  sermon  Adversus  Arium  et  SabeUium,  a  sermon  De 

'  'E^ariiJiepov,  or  Homilise  ix.  in  Hexaemeron.  Opera,  i.  pp.  1-125,  ed.  Gamier 
(new  ed.).  An  extended  analysis  of  these  sermons  is  given  by  Schrockh,  xLii.  pp. 
168-181. 

^  Moralia,  or  short  ethical  rules,  Constitutiones  monasticae,  &c.,  in  torn.  ii. 

^  Including  some  spurious,  some  doubtful,  and  some  from  otlier  persons.  Tom. 
iii.  pp.  97-681.    The  numbering  of  Gamier  differs  from  those  of  former  editors. 


V 


904:  THIKD    PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Spiritu  Sancto  adv.  Macedonianos,  and  a  fragment  Do  processione 

Spiritus  S.  a  Filio  (doubtful). 

II.  Lives  in  the  Acta  Sanctorum,  and  in  Butlee,  sub  Mart.  9.     Tille- 

mont:    Mem.  torn.  ix.  p.  561  sqq.     Scheockh:   Part  xiv.  pp.  1-147. 

Jul.  Eupp  :  Gregors  des  Bischofs  von  Nyssa  Leben  und  Meinungen. 

jl »     Leipz.  1834:  (unsatisfactory).     "W.  Mollee:  Gregorii  Nyss.  doctrina  de 

hominis  natura,  etc.     Halis,  1854.  and  article  in  Herzog^s  Encykl.  vol. 

/HF"'    J,      jv.  p.  354  sqq.'  fc^C^j  eJ    K  3^^.-  ^  4  0  U- 

/..if  Gkegokt  of  In  yssa  was  a  younger  brother  of  Basil,  and  the 

h  .  ,1  '•  third  son  of  his  parents.  Of  his  honorable  descent  he  made 
no  account.  Blood,  wealth,  and  splendor,  says  he,  we  should 
leave  to  the  friends  of  the  world ;  the  Christian's  lineage  is  his 
affinity  with  the  divine,  his  fatherland  is  virtue,  his  freedom 
is  the  sonship  of  God.  He  was  weakly  and  timid,  and  born 
not  so  much  for  practical  life,  as  for  study  and  speculation. 
He  formed  his  mind  chiefly  upon  the  writings  of  Origen,  and 
under  the  direction  of  his  brother,  whom  he  calls  his  father 
and  preceptor.     Further  than  this  his  early  life  is  unknown. 

After  spending  a  short  time  as  a  rhetorician  he  broke  away 
from  the  world,  retu'ed  into  solitude  in  Pontus,  and  became 
enamored  of  the  ascetic  life. 

Quite  in  the  spirit  of  the  then  widely-spread  tendency 
towards  the  monastic  Kfe,  he,  though  himself  married,  com- 
mends virginity  in  a  special  work,  as  a  higher  grade  of  perfec- 
tion, and  depicts  the  happiness  of  one  who  is  raised  above  the 
incumbrances  and  snares  of  marriage,  and  thus,  as  he  thinks, 
restored  to  the  original  state  of  man  in  Paradise.'  "  From  all 
the  evils  of  marriage,"  he  says,  "  virginity  is  free ;  it  has  no 
lost  children,  no  lost  husband  to  bemoan ;  it  is  always  with  its 
Bridegroom,  and  delights  in  its  devout  exercises,  and,  when 
death  comes,  it  is  not  separated  from  him,  but  united  with 
him  forever."     Tlie  essence  of  spiritual  virginity,  however,  in 

'  That  he  was  married  appears  from  his  own  concession,  De  virginitate,  0.  3, 
where  by  Theoschia  he  means  his  wife  (not,  as  some  earlier  Konian  scholars,  and 
Rupp,  1.  c.  p.  25,  suppose,  his  sister),  and  from  Gregory  Nazlanzen's  letter  of  con- 
dolence, Ep.  95.  He  laments  that  his  eulogy  of  irap^ivia  can  no  longer  bring  him 
the  desired  fruit.  Theosebia  seems  to  have  lived  till  384.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  in 
his  short  eulogy  of  her,  says  that  she  rivalled  her  brothers-in-law  (Basil  and  Peter) 
who  were  in  the  priesthood. 


§   165.      GREGORY   OF   NYSSA.  905 

his  opinion,  by  no  means  consists  merely  in  the  small  matter 
of  sensual  abstinence,  but  in  the  purity  of  the  whole  life.  Yir- 
ginity  is  to  him  the  true  philosophy,  the  perfect  freedom.  The 
pui-pose  of  asceticism  in  general  he  considered  to  be  not  the 
affliction  of  tlie  body — which  is  only  a  means — but  the  easiest 
possible  motion  of  the  spiritual  functions. 

His  brother  Basil,  in  372,  called  him  against  his  will  from 
his  learned  ease  into  his  own  vicinity  as  bishop  of  ISTyssa,  an 
inconsidei-able  town  of  Cappadocia.  He  thought  it  better  that 
the  place  should  receive  its  honor  from  his  brother,  than  that 
his  brother  should  receive  his  honor  from  his  place.  And  so 
it  turned  out.  As  Gregory  labored  zealously  for  the  Nicene 
faith,  he  drew  the  hatred  of  the  Ariaus,  who  succeeded  in  de- 
posing him  at  a  synod  in  376,  and  driving  him  into  exile. 
But  two  years  later,  when  the  emperor  Yalens  died  and  Gra- 
tian  revoked  the  sentences  of  banishment,  Gregory  recovered 
his  bishopric. 

Now  otlier  trials  came  upon  him.  His  brothers  and  sisters 
died  in  rapid  successi(3n.  He  delivered  a  eulogy  upon  Basil, 
whom  he  greatly  venerated,  and  he  described  the  life  and 
death  of  his  beautiful  and  noble  sister  Macrina,  who,  after  the 
death  of  her  betrothed,  that  she  might  remain  true  to  him, 
chose  single  life,  and  afterwards  retired  with  her  mother  into 
seclusion,  and  exerted  great  influence  over  her  brothers. 

Into  her  mouth  he  put  his  theological  instructions  on  the 
soul,  death,  resurrection,  and  final  restoration.'  She  died  in 
the  arms  of  Gregory,  with  this  prayer :  "  Thou,  O  God,  hast 
taken  from  me  the  fear  of  death.  Thou  hast  granted  me,  that 
the  end  of  this  life  should  be  the  beginning  of  true  life.  Thou 
givest  our  bodies  in  their  time  to  the  sleep  of  death,  and 
awakest  them  again  from  sleep  with  the  last  trumpet.  .  .  . 
Thou  hast  delivered  us  from  the  curse  and  from  sin  by  Thy- 

'  In  his  dialogue,  De  anima  et  resurrectione  (llepl  ■i/vxr\s  /cal  a.va(n6.(j%u>s  nera 
Ti)5  iSt'as  d5eA(/)^s  Maxplvrii  5ia\oyos),  0pp.  iii.  181  sqq.  (ed.  Morell.  1638),  also  sep- 
arately edited  by  J.  G.  Krabinger,  Lips.  1837,  and  more  recently,  together  with  hi3 
biography  of  his  sister,  by  Franc.  Oehler,  with  a  German  translation,  Leipz.  1858. 
The  last-mentioned  edition  is  at  the  same  time  the  first  volume  of  a  projected  Select 
Library  of  the  Fathers,  presenting  the  original  text  with  a  new  German  translation. 
The  dialogue  was  written  after  the  death  of  his  brother  Basil,  and  occasioned  by  it 


906  THIKD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590, 

self  becoming  both  for  us ;  Thou  hast  bruised  the  head  of  the 
serpent,  hast  broken  open  the  gates  of  hell,  hast  overcome  him 
who  had  the  power  of  death,  and  hast  opened  to  us  the  way  to 
resurrection.  For  the  ruin  of  the  enemy  and  the  security  of 
our  life.  Thou  hast  put  upon  those  who  feared  Thee  a  sign,  the 
sign  of  Tliy  holy  cross,  O  eternal  God,  to  whom  I  am  betrothed 
from  the  womb,  whom  my  soul  has  loved  with  all  its  might, 
to  whom  I  have  dedicated,  from  my  youth  up  till  now,  my 
flesh  and  my  soul.  Oh !  send  to  me  an  angel  of  light,  to  lead 
me  to  the  place  of  refreshment,  where  is  the  water  of  peace,  in 
the  bosom  of  the  holy  fatliers.  Thou  who  hast  broken  the 
flaming  Sword,  and  bringest  back  to  Paradise  the  man  who 
is  crucified  with  Thee  and  flees  to  Thy  mercy.  Remember 
me  also  in  Thy  kingdom !  .  .  .  Forgive  me  what  in  word, 
deed,  or  thought,  I  have  done  amiss !  Blameless  and  without 
spot  may  my  soul  be  received  into  Thy  hands,  as  a  burnt- 
offering  before  Thee ! "  ' 

Gregory  attended  the  ecumenical  council  of  Constantinople, 
and  undoubtedly,  since  he  was  one  of  the  most  eminent  theo- 
logians of  the  time,  exerted  a  powerful  influence  there,  and 
according  to  a  later,  but  erroneous,  tradition,  he  composed  the 
additions  to  the  Nicene  Creed  which  were  there  sanctioned.'* 
The  council  intrusted  to  him,  as  "  one  of  the  pillars  of  catholic 
orthodoxy,"  a  tour  of  visitation  to  Arabia  and  Jerusalem, 
where  disturbances  had  broken  out  which  threatened  a  schism. 
He  found  Palestine  in  a  sad  condition,  and  therefore  dissuaded 
a  Cappadocian  abbot,  who  asked  his  advice  about  a  pilgrimage 
of  his  monks  to  Jerusalem.  "  Change  of  place,"  says  he, 
"brings  us  no  nearer  God,  but  where  thou  art,  God  can 
come  to  tliee,  if  only  the  inn  of  thy  soul  is  ready.  ...  It 
is  better  to  go  out  of  the  body  and  to  raise  one's  self  to  the 
Lord,  than  to  leave  Cappadocia  to  journey  to  Palestine."  He 
did  not  succeed  in  making  peace,  and  he  returned  to  Cappa- 
docia lamenting  that  there  were  in  Jerusalem  men  "  who 
showed  a  hatred  towards  their  brethren,  such  as  they  ought  to 

'  Gr.  Nyss.  Tlepl  rov  l3lov  rrjs  (laKapias  Ma/rpiVrjs. 

^  In  Niccph.  Call.  H.  E.  xiii.  18.      These  additions  were  in  use  several  years 
before  381,  and  are  found  in  Epiphanius,  Anchorate,  n.  120  (torn.  ii.  p.  122). 


§    165.      GKEGOET   OF   NTSSA.  907 

Lave  only  towards  the  devil,  towards  sin,  and  towards  the 
avowed  enemies  of  tlie  Saviour." 

Of  his  later  life  we  know  very  little.  He  was  in  Constan- 
tinople thrice  afterwards,  in  383,  385,  and  394,  and  he  died 
about  the  year  395. 

The  wealth  of  his  intellectual  life  he  dej)osited  in  his  numer- 
ous writings,  above  all  in  his  controversial  doctrinal  works: 
Against  Eunomins ;  Against  Apollinaris ;  On  the  Deity  of  the 
Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost ;  On  the  diflference  between  ousia  and 
hypostasis  in  God ;  and  in  his  catechetical  compend  of  the 
Christian  faith.'  The  beautiful  dialogue  with  his  sister  Macri- 
na  on  the  soui  and  the  resurrection  has  been  ali-eady  men- 
tioned. Besides  these  he  wrote  many  Homilies,  especially  on 
the  creation  of  the  world,  and  of  man,*  on  the  life  of  Moses,  on 
the  Psalms,  on  Ecclesiastes,  on  the  Song  of  Solomon,  on  the 
Lord's  Prayer,  on  the  Beatitudes ;  Eulogies  on  eminent  mar- 
tyrs and  saints  (St.  Stephen,  the  Forty  Martyi's,  Gregory 
Thaumaturgus,  Ephrem,  Meletius,  his  brother  Basil) ;  vari- 
ous valuable  ascetic  tracts;  and  a  biography  of  his  sister 
Macrina,  addressed  to  the  monk  Olympios. 

Gregory  was  more  a  man  of  thought  than  of  action.  He 
had  a  fine  metaphysical  head,  and  did  lasting  service  in  the 
vindication  of  the  mystery  of  the  Trinity  and  the  incarnation, 
and  in  the  accurate  distinction  between  essence  and  hypostasis. 
Of  all  the  church  teachers  of  the  Nicene  age  he  is  the  nearest 
to  Origen.  He  not  only  follows  his  sometimes  utterly  extrava- 
gant allegorical  method  of  interpretation,  but  even  to  a  great 
extent  falls  in  with  his  dogmatic  views."  "With  him,  as  with 
Origen,  human  freedom  plays  a  gi'eat  part.     Both  are  idealis- 

*  The  Ao'yoj  KaTTjxiTi/cos  6  fxiyas  Stands  worthily  by  the  side  of  the  similar  work 
of  Origen,  De  principiis.  Separate  edition,  Gr.  and  Lat.  with  notes,  by  J.  G.  Kra- 
binger,  Munich,  1838. 

^  The  Hexaemeron  of  Gregory  is  a  supplement  to  his  brother  Basil's  Hexaeme- 
ron,  and  discusses  the  more  obscure  metaphysical  questions  connected  with  this 
subject.  His  book  on  the  "Workmanship  of  Man,  though  written  first,  may  be 
regarded  as  a  continuation  of  the  Hexaemeron,  and  beautifully  sets  forth  the  spir- 
itual and  royal  dignity  and  destination  of  man,  for  whom  the  world  was  prepared 
and  adorned  as  his  palace. 

^  On  his  relation  to  Origen,  comp.  the  appendix  of  Rupp,  1.  c.  pp  243-2G2. 


908  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

tic,  and  sometimes,  without  intending  it  or  knowing  it,  fall 
into  contradiction  with  the  church  doctrine,  especially  in 
eschatology.  Gregory  adopts,  for  example,  the  doctrine  of 
the  final  restoration  of  all  things.  The  plan  of  redemption  is 
in  his  view  absolutely  universal,  and  embraces  all  spiritual 
beings.  Good  is  the  only  positive  reality ;  evil  is  the  negative, 
the  non-existent,  and  must  finally  abolish  itself,  because  it  is 
not  of  God.  Unbelievers  must  indeed  pass  tlii'ough  a  second 
death,  in  order  to  be  purged  from  the  filthiness  of  the  flesh. 
But  God  does  not  give  them  up,  for  they  are  his  property, 
spiritual  natures  allied  to  him.  His  love,  which  draws  pure 
souls  easily  and  without  pain  to  itself,  becomes  a  purifying 
fire  to  all  who  cleave  to  the  earthly,  till  the  impure  element  is 
driven  off".  As  all  comes  forth  from  God,  so  must  all  return 
into  him  at  last. 


§  166.     Crregory  Naziansen. 

I.  S.  GEEGOEirs  THEOLOGrs,  Tulgo  NAziAxzENrs :  Oi^ei-a  omnia,  Gr.  et  Lat. 
opera  et  studio  monachorum  S.  Benedict!  e  congreg.  S.  Mauri  (Clemen- 
cet).  Paris,  1778,  torn.  i.  (containing  his  orations).  This  magnificent 
edition  (one  of  the  finest  of  the  Maurian  editions  of  the  fathers)  was 
interrupted  by  the  French  Revolution,  but  afterwards  resumed,  and 
with  a  second  volume  (after  papers  left  by  the  Maurians)  completed 
by^.  B.  CaiUati,  Par.  1837-40,  2  vols.  fol.  Eeprmted  in  Jligne's 
Patrolog.  Grasc.  (torn.  35-38),  Petit-Montrouge,  1857,  in  4  vols.  (On 
the  separate  editions  of  his  Orationes  and  Carmina,  see  Brunet,  Man, 
du  libraire,  torn.  ii.  1728  sq.) 

IT.  Biographical  notices  in  Gregory's  Epistles  and  Poems,  in  Soceates, 
SozoMEX,  Theodoeet,  RuEixrs,  and  Sihdas  (s.  v.  Vpr)y6pioi).  Geego- 
Eius  Peesbytee  (of  uncertain  origin,  perhaps  of  Cappadocia  in  the  tenth 
century) :  Bios  toO  Vp-qyoplov  (Greek  and  Latin  in  Migne's  ed.  of  the 
Opera,  tom.  i.  243-304).  G.  Heemaxt  :  La  vie  de  S.  Basile  le  Grand  et 
ceUe  de  S.  Gregoire  de  Nazianz.  Par.  1679,  2  vols.  Acta  SAxcTOEnr, 
tom.  ii.  Maji,  p.  373  sqq.  Bexed.  Editoees  :  Vita  Greg,  ex  iis  potis- 
simum  scriptis  adornata  (in  Migne's  ed.  torn.  i.  pp.  147-242).  Tille- 
mont:  Memoires,  tom.  ix.  pp.  305-500,  692-731.  Le  Cleec:  Biblio- 
theque  Universelle,  tom.  sviii.  pp.  1-128.  "W.  Cave:  Lives  of  the 
Fathers,  vol.  iii.  pp.  1-90  (ed.  Oxf.  1840).  Soiieockh:  Part  xiii.  pp. 
275-460.  Gael  ULLMA^^x:  Gregorius  von  Nazianz,  der  Theologe. 
Ein  Beitrag  zur  Kirchen-  und  Dogmengeschichte  des  4ten  Jahrhun- 


§    166.       GREGOKT   NAZIANZEN.  909 

derts.     Dai-nistadt,  1825. '  (One  of  the  best,  historical  monographs  by 

a  theologian  of  kindred  spirit.)     Oomp.  also  the  articles  of  IIefele  in 

TVetzer  und  Welte's  Kirchenlexikon,  vol.  iv.  736  ff.,  and  Gass  in  Her-    J4'^\t^^i 

zog's  Encykl.  vol.  v.  349,  // 


J'^'0\M.^ 


Gkegoky  Nazianzen,  or  Gregory  the  Theologian,  is  the 
third  in  the  Cappadocian  triad ;  inferior  to  his  bosom  friend 
Basil  as  a  church  ruler,  and  to  his  namesake  of  Nyssa  as  a 
speculative  thinker,  but  superior  to  both  as  an  orator.  "With 
them  he  exhibits  the  flower  of  Greek  theology  in  close  union 
■with  the  Kicene  faith,  and  was  one  of  the  champions  of  ortho- 
doxy, though  with  a  mind  open  to  free  speculation.  His  life, 
with  its  alternations  of  high  station,  monastic  seclusion,  love 
of  severe  studies,  enthusiasm  for  poetry,  nature,  and  friendship, 
possesses  a  romantic  charm.  /He  was  "  by  inclination  and  for- 
tune tossed  between  the  silence  of  a  contemplative  life  and  the 
tumult  of  church  administration,  unsatisfied  with  either, 
neither  a  thinker  nor  a  poet,  but,  according  to  his  youthful 
desire,  an  orator,  who,  though  often  bombastic  and  dry, 
labored  as  powerfully  for  the  victory  of  orthodoxy  as  for  true 
practical  Christianity." '  / 

"^  Gregory  Kazianzen  was  born  about  330,  a  year  before  the 
emperor  Julian,  either  at  Nazianzum,  a  market-town  in  the 
south-western  part  of  Cappadocia,  where  his  father  was  bishop, 
or  in  the  neighboring  village  of  Arianzus.* 

'  So  K.  Hask  admirably  characterizes  him,  in  his  Lehrbuch,  p.  138  CZth  ed.). 
The  judgment  of  Gibbon  (Decline  and  Fall,  ch.  xxii.)  is  characteristic :  "  The  title  of 
Saint  has  been  added  to  his  name :  but  the  tenderness  of  his  heart,  and  the  elegance 
of  his  genius,  reflect  a  more  pleasing  lustre  on  the  memory  of  Gregory  Nazianzen." 
The  praise  of  "the  tenderness  of  his  heart "  suggests  to  the  skeptical  historian 
another  fling  at  the  ancient  church,  by  adding  the  note :  "  I  can  only  be  understood 
to  mean,  that  such  was  his  natural  temper  when  it  was  not  hardened,  or  inflamed, 
by  religious  zeal.  From  his  retirement,  he  exhorts  Nectarius  to  prosecute  the  here- 
tics of  Constantinople." 

'  Respecting  the  time  and  place  of  his  birth,  views  are  divided.  According  to 
Suidas,  Gregory  was  over  ninety  years  old,  and  therefore,  since  he  died  in  389  or 
390,  must  have  been  born  about  the  year  300.  This  statement  was  accepted  by 
Pagi  and  other  Roman  divines,  to  remove  the  scandal  of  his  canonized  father's 
having  begotten  children  after  he  became  bishop;  but  it  is  irreconcilable  with 
the  fact  that  Gregory,  according  to  his  own  testimony  (Carmen  de  vita  sua,  v.  112 
and  238,  and  Orat.  v.  c.  23),  studied  in  Athens  at  the  same  time  with  Juhan  the 
Apostate,  therefore  in  355,  and  left  Athens  at  the  age  of  thirty  years.      Comp. 


910  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D,    311-590. 

In  the  formation  of  his  religious  character  his  mother 
Nonna,  one  of  the  noblest  Christian  women  of  antiquity, 
exerted  a  deep  and  wholesome  influence.  By  her  prayers  and 
her  holy  life  she  brought  about  the  conversion  of  her  husband 
from  the  sect  of  the  Hypsistarians,  who,  without  positive  faith, 
worshipped  simply  a  supreme  being ;  and  she  consecrated  her 
son,  as  Hannah  consecrated  Samnel,  even  before  his  birth,  to 
the  service  of  God.  "  She  was,"  as  Gregory  describes  her,  "  a 
wife  according  to  the  mind  of  Solomon ;  in  all  things  subject 
to  her  husband  according  to  the  laws  of  marriage,  not  ashamed 
to  be  his  teacher  and  his  leader  in  true  religion.  She  solved 
the  difficult  problem  of  uniting  a  higher  culture,  especially  in 
knowledge  of  divine  things  and  strict  exercise  of  devotion,  with 
the  practical  care  of  her  household.  If  she  was  active  in  her 
house,  she  seemed  to  know  nothing  of  the  exercises  of  religion ; 
if  she  occupied  herself  with  God  and  his  worship,  she  seemed 
to  be  a  stranger  to  every  earthly  occupation :  she  was  whole 
in  everything.  Experiences  had  instilled  into  her  unbounded 
confidence  in  the  effects  of  believing  prayer ;  therefore  she  was 
most  diligent  in  supplications,  and  by  prayer  overcame  even 
the  deepest  feelings  of  grief  over  her  own  and  others'  suffer- 
ings. She  had  by  this  means  attained  such  control  over  her 
spirit,  that  in  every  sorrow  she  encountered,  she  never  uttered 
a  plaintive  tone  before  she  had  thanked  God."  He  especially 
celebrates  also  her  extraordinary  liberality  and  self-denying 
love  for  the  poor  and  the  sick.  But  it  seems  to  be  not  in  per- 
fect harmony  with  this,  that  he  relates  of  her:  "Towards 
heathen  women  she  was  so  intolerant,  that  she  never  offered 
her  mouth  or  hand  to  them  in  salutation.*  She  ate  no  salt 
with  those  who  came  from  the  unhallowed  altars  of  idols. 
Pagan  temples  she  did  not  look  at,  much  less  would  she  have 
stepped  upon  their  ground ;  and  she  was  as  far  from  visiting 

Tillemont,  torn.  ix.  pp.  693-697 ;  Schriickli,  Part  xiii.  p.  276,  and  the  admirable 
monograph  of  Ullmann,  p.  548  sqq.  (of  which  I  have  made  special  use  in  this  sec- 
tion). 

^  Against  the  express  injunction  of  love  for  enemies,  Matt.  v.  44  ff.  The  com- 
mand of  John  in  his  2d  Epi.stle,  v.  10,  11,  which  might  be  quoted  in  justification  of 
Norma,  refers  not  to  pagans,  but  to  anti-Christian  heretics. 


§  166.      GEEGORT   NAZIANZEN.  911 

the  theatre."  Of  course  her  piety  moved  entirely  in  the  spirit 
of  that  time,  bore  the  stamp  of  ascetic  legalism  rather  than  of 
evangelical  freedom,  and  adhered  rigidly  to  certain  outward 
forms.  Significant  also  is  her  great  reverence  for  sacred 
things.  "  She  did  not  venture  to  turn  her  back  upon  the  holy 
table,  or  to  spit  upon  the  floor  of  the  church."  Her  death 
was  worthy  of  a  holy  life.  At  a  great  age,  in  the  church 
which  her  husband  had  built  almost  entirely  with  his  own 
means,  she  died,  holding  fast  with  one  hand  to  the  altar  and 
raising  the  other  imploringly  to  heaven,  with  the  words :  "  Be 
gracious  to  me,  O  Christ,  my  King !  "  Amidst  universal  sor- 
row, especially  among  the  widows  and  orphans  whose  comfort 
and  help  she  had  been,  she  was  laid  to  rest  by  the  side  of  her 
husband  near  the  graves  of  the  martyrs.  Her  affectionate  son 
says  in  one  of  the  poems  in  which  he  extols  her  piety  and  her 
blessed  end :  "  Bewail,  O  mortals,  the  mortal  race ;  but  when 
one  dies,  like  Nonna,  praying^  then  weep  I  not." 

Gregory  was  early  instructed  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  and 
in  the  rudiments  of  science.  He  soon  conceived  a  special  pre- 
dilection for  the  study  of  oratory,  and  through  the  influence 
of  his  mother,  strengthened  by  a  dream,^  he  determined  on  the 
celibate  life,  that  he  might  devote  himself  without  distraction 
to  the  kingdom  of  God.  Like  the  other  church  teachers  of  this 
period,  he  also  gave  this  condition  the  preference,  and  extolled 
it  in  orations  and  poems,  though  without  denying  the  useful- 
ness and  divine  appointment  of  marriage.  His  father,  and  his 
friend  Gregory  of  ISTyssa  were  among  the  few  bishops  who 
lived  in  wedlock. 

From  his  native  town  he  went  for  his  further  education  to 
Csesarea  in  Cappadocia,  where  he  probably  already  made  a 
preliminary  acquaintance  with  Basil ;  then  to  Csesarea  in 
Palestine,  where  there  were  at  that  time  celebrated  schools  of 
eloquence ;  thence  to  xVlexandria,  where  his  revered  Athana- 
sius  wore  the  supreme  dignity  of  the  church ;  and  finally  to 

'  There  appeared  to  him  two  veiled  virgins,  of  unearthly  beauty,  who  called 
themselves  Purity  and  Chastity^  companions  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  friends  of  those 
who  renounced  all  earthly  connections  for  the  sake  of  leading  a  perfectly  divina  life. 
After  exhorting  the  youth  to  join  himself  to  them  in  spirit,  they  rose  again  to 
heaven.     Carmen  iv.  v.  205-285. 


912  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D,    311-590. 

Alliens,  which  still  maintained  its  ancient  renown  as  the  seat 
of  Grecian  science  and  art.  Upon  the  voyage  thither  he  sur- 
vived a  fearful  storm,  which  threw  him  into  the  greatest  men- 
tal anguish,  especially  because,  though  educated  a  Christian, 
he,  according  to  a  not  unusual  custom  of  that  time,  had  not 
yet  received  holy  baptism,  which  was  to  him  the  condition  of 
salvation.  His  deliverance  he  ascribed  partly  to  the  interces- 
sion of  his  parents,  who  had  intimation  of  his  peril  by  present- 
iments and  dreams,  and  he  took  it  as  a  second  consecration  to 
the  spiritual  office. 

In  Athens  he  formed  or  strengthened  the  bond  of  that 
beautiful  Christian  friendship  with  Basil,  of  w^hich  we  have 
already  spoken  in  the  life  of  Basil.  They  were,  as  Gregory 
says,  as  it  were  only  one  soul  animating  two  bodies.  He  be- 
came acquainted  also  with  the  prince  Julian,  who  was  at  that 
time  studying  there,  but  felt  wholly  repelled  by  him,  and  said 
of  him  w^ith  prophetic  foresight :  "  What  evil  is  the  Roman 
empire  here  educating  for  itself ! " '  He  was  afterwards  a 
bitter  antagonist  of  Julian,  and  wrote  two  invective  discourses 
against  him  after  his  death,  which  are  inspired,  however,  more 
by  the  fire  of  passion  than  by  pure  enthusiasm  for  Christianity, 
and  w^hich  were  intended  to  expose  him  to  universal  ignominy 
as  a  homble  monument  of  enmity  to  Christianity  and  of  the 
retributive  judgment  of  God." 

Friends  wished  him  to  settle  in  Athens  as  a  teacher  of  elo- 
quence, but  he  left  there  in  his  thirtieth  year,  and  returned 
through  Constantinople,  where  he  took  with  him  his  brother 
Csesarius,  a  distinguished  phj^sician,'  to  his  native  city  and  his 

'  Ofoy  Kanhv  7]  ''Pwp.aluv  rp4(pft. 

*  These  Invectivse,  or  \6yoi  ffTrjXiTtvriKoi,  are,  according  to  the  old  order,  the 
3d  and  4th,  accordmg  to  the  new  the  4th  and  5th,  of  Gregory's  Orations,  torn.  i. 
pp.  V8-1 76,  of  the  Benedictine  edition. 

'  To  this  Cjesarius,  who  was  afterwards  physician  in  ordinary  to  the  emperor  in 
Constantinople,  many,  following  Photius,  ascribe  the  still  extant  collection  of  theo- 
logical and  philosophical  questions,  Dialogi  iv  sive  Qusestiones  theol.  et  philos. 
145 ;  but  without  sufficient  ground.  Comp.  Fabricius,  Bibl.  Gr.  viii.  p.  435.  He 
was  a  true  Christian,  but  was  not  baptized  till  shortly  before  his  death  in  368.  His 
mother  Nonna  followed  the  funeral  procession  in  the  white  raiment  of  festive  joy. 
He  was  afterwards,  like  his  brother  Gregory,  his  sister  Gorgonia,  and  his  mother, 
received  into  the  number  of  the  saints  of  the  Catholic  church. 


§   166.      GKEGOKT   NAZIANZEN.  913 

parents'  house.  At  this  time  his  baptism  took  place.  With 
his  whole  soul  he  now  threw  himself  into  a  strict  ascetic  life. 
He  renounced  innocent  enjoyments,  even  to  music,  because 
they  flatter  the  senses.  "His  food  was  bread  and  salt,  his 
drink  water,  his  bed  the  bare  ground,  his  garment  of  coarse, 
rough  cloth.  Labor  filled  the  day ;  praying,  singing,  and  holy 
contemplation,  a  great  pa^i't  of  the  night.  His  earlier  life, 
which  was  anything  but  loose,  only  not  so  very  strict,  seemed 
to  him  reprehensible ;  his  former  laughing  now  cost  him  many 
tears.  Silence  and  quiet  meditation  were  law  and  pleasure  to 
him."  '  Nothing  but  love  to  his  parents  restrained  him  from 
entire  seclusion,  and  induced  him,  contrary  to  talent  and  incli- 
nation, to  assist  his  father  in  the  management  of  his  household 
and  his  property. 

But  he  soon  followed  his  powerful  bent  toward  the  contem- 
plative life  of  solitude,  and  spent  a  short  time  with  Basil  in  a 
quiet  district  of  Pontus  in  prayer,  spiritual  contemplations, 
and  manual  labors.  "  Who  will  transport  me,"  he  afterwards 
wrote  to  his  friend  concerning  this  visit,^  "  back  to  those  for- 
mer days,  in  which  I  revelled  with  thee  in  privations  ?  For 
voluntary  poverty  is  after  all  far  more  honorable  than  enforced 
enjoyment.  Who  will  give  me  back  those  songs  and  vigils  ? 
who,  those  risings  to  God  in  prayer,  that  unearthly,  incor- 
poreal life,  that  fellowship  and  that  spiritual  harmony  of 
brothers  raised  by  thee  to  a  God-like  life?  who,  the  ardent 
searching  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  the  light  which,  under 
the  guidance  of  the  Spirit,  we  found  therein  ? "  Then  he  men- 
tions the  lesser  enjoyments  of  the  beauties  of  surrounding 
nature. 

On  a  visit  to  his  parents'  house,  Gregory  against  his  will, 
and  even  without  his  previous  knowledge,  was  ordained  pres- 
byter by  his  father  before  the  assembled  congregation  on  a 
feast  day  of  the  year  361.  Such  forced  elections  and  ordina- 
tions, though  very  oflFensive  to  our  taste,  were  at  that  time 
frequent,  especially  upon  the  urgent  wish  of  the  people,  whose 
voice  in  many  instances  proved  to  be  indeed  the  voice  of  God. 

'  Ullmann,  1.  c.  p.  50. 

^  Epist.  ix.  p.  774,  of  the  old  order,  or  Ep.  vi.  of  the  new  (ed.  Bened.  ii.  p.  6). 
VOL.  II. — 58 


914  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Basil  also,  and  Augustine,  were  ordained  presbyters,  Atliana- 
sius  and  Ambrose  bishops,  against  their  will.  Gregory  fled 
soon  after,  it  is  true,  to  bis  friend  in  Pontus,  but  out  of  regard 
to  bis  aged  parents  and  the  pressing  call  of  the  church,  he  re- 
tui'ned  to  Nazianzum  towards  Easter  in  362,  and  delivered  his 
first  pulpit  discourse,  in  which  he  justified  himself  in  his  con- 
duct, and  said :  "  It  has  its  advantage  to  hold  back  a  little 
from  the  call  of  God,  as  Moses,  and  after  him  Jeremiah,  did 
on  account  of  their  age ;  but  it  has  also  its  advantage  to  come 
forward  readily,  when  God  calls,  like  Aaron  and  Isaiah ;  pro- 
vided both  be  done  with  a  devout  spirit,  the  one  on  account  of 
inherent  weakness,  the  other  in  reliance  upon  the  strength  of 
him  who  calls."  His  enemies  accused  him  of  haughty  cour 
tempt  of  the  priestly  ofiice ;  but  he  gave  as  the  most  import- 
ant reason  of  his  flight,  that  he  did  not  consider  himself 
worthy  to  preside  over  a  flock,  and  to  undertake  the  care  of 
immortal  souls,  especially  in  such  stormy  times. 

Basil,  who,  as  metropolitan,  to  strengthen  the  catholic  in- 
terest against  Arianism,  set  about  the  estabKshment  of  new 
bishoprics  in  the  small  towns  of  Cappadocia,  intrusted  to  his 
young  friend  one  such  charge  in  Sasima,  a  poor  market  town 
at  the  junction  of  three  highways,  destitute  of  water,  verdure, 
and  society,  frequented  only  by  rude  wagoners,  and  at  the 
time  an  apple  of  discord  between  him  and  his  opponent,  the 
bishop  Anthimus  of  Tyana.  A  very  strange  way  of  showing 
friendship,  unjustifiable  even  by  the  supposition  that  Basil 
wished  to  exercise  the  humility  and  self-denial  of  Gregory.' 
No  wonder  that,  though  a  bishopric  in  itself  was  of  no  account 
to  Gregory,  this  act  deeply  wounded  his  sense  of  honor,  and  pro- 
duced a  temporary  alienation  between  him  and  Basil."     At  the 

'  Gibbon  (ch.  xxvii.)  very  unjustly  attributes  this  action  of  Basil  to  hierarchical 
pride  and  to  an  intention  to  insult  Gregory.  Basil  treated  his  own  brother  not 
much  better ;  for  Nyssa  was  likewise  an  insignificant  place. 

"  Gregory  gave  to  the  pangs  of  injured  friendship  a  touching  expression  in  the 
following  lines  from  the  poem  on  his  own  Life  (De  vita  sua,  vss.  476  sqq.  torn.  ii.  p. 
699,  of  the  Bened.  ed.,  or  tom.  iii.  1062,  in  Migne's  ed.) : 

ToiaCr'  'Arrival,  Ka\  irovot  KOivol  \6yci;v, 

'OiJ.6aTiy6s  re  Koi  cuve'trTios  $ios, 

NoDs  efy  eV  aiKpolv,  ov  Svu,  ^av/j.'  'EAAaSos, 

Kal  Serial,  K6<TfJL0V  n\v  iis  Triip/So)  fiaKilv, 


§   166.      GEEGOKY  NAZIANZEN.  915 

combined  request  of  bis  friend  and  bis  aged  fatber,  be  suflfered 
bimself  indeed  to  be  consecrated  to  tbe  new  office ;  but  it  is 
very  doubtful  wbetber  be  ever  went  to  Sasima.*  At  all  events 
we  soon  afterwards  find  bim  in  bis  solitude,  and  tben  again,  in 
372,  assistant  of  bis  fatber  in  ^"azianzum.  In  a  remarkable  dis- 
course delivered  in  the  presence  of  bis  fatber  in  372,  be  repre- 
sented to  tbe  congregation  bis  peculiar  fluctuation  between  an 
innate  love  of  tbe  contemplative  life  of  seclusion  and  tbe  call 
of  the  Spirit  to  public  labor. 

"  Come  to  my  help,"  said  be  to  bis  bearers,"  "  for  I  am 
almost  torn  asunder  by  my  inward  longing  and  by  tbe  Spirit. 
Tbe  longing  urges  me  to  fligbt,  to  solitude  in  tbe  mountains, 
to  quietude  of  soul  and  body,  to  withdrawal  of  spirit  from  all 
sensuous  things,  and  to  retu-ement  into  myself,  that  I  may 
commune  undisturbed  with  God,  and  be  wholly  penetrated  by 
the  rays  of  His  Spirit.  .  .  .  But  the  other,  tbe  Spirit, 
would  lead  me  into  the  midst  of  life,  to  serve  tbe  common 
weal,  and  by  furthering  others  to  fui'ther  myself,  to  spread 
light,  and  to  present  to  God  a  people  for  His  possession,  a  holy 

Ai'Tov?  5e  Kotvhu  r^  0€^  ^c«'  Piov, 
ASyovs  T6  Sovuai  tw  fj.6v(jj  (TO(p^  A6yti!. 
AieaKtSaarai  irdvTa,  e^piTrrai  x<^l^^h 
ASpoi  (pepovai  ras  TraXaias  iAniSas. 

"  Talia  Athense,  et  communia  studia, 
Ejusdem  texti  et  mensae  consors  vita, 
Mens  una,  non  duse  in  ambobus,  res  mira  Graecise, 
Dataeque  dexterae,  mundum  ut  procul  rejiceremus, 
Deoque  simul  viveremus, 
Et  literas  soli  sapienti  Verbo  dedicaremus. 
Dissipata  haec  sunt  omnia,  et  humi  projecta, 
Yenti  auferunt  spes  nostras  antiquas."  l 

Gibbon  (ch.  xxvii.)  quotes  this  passage  with  admiration,  though  with  characteristic 
omission  of  vss.  479-481,  which  refer  to  their  harmony  in  religion;  and  he  aptly 
alludes  to  a  parallel  from  Shakespeare,  who  had  never  read  the  poems  of  Gregory 
Nazianzen,  but  who  gave  to  similar  feelings  a  similar  expression,  in  the  Midsummer 
Night's  Dream,  where  Helena  utters  the  same  pathetic  complaint  to  her  friend 
Hermia: 

"  Is  all  the  counsel  that  we  two  have  shared, 
The  sister's  vows,"  &c. 
*  Gibbon  says :  "  He  solemnly  protests,  that  he  never  consummated  his  spiritual 
marriage  with  this  disgusting  bride." 

^  Orat.  xii.  4 ;  torn.  i.  249  sq.  (in  Migne's  ed.  tom.  i.  p.  847). 


916  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

people,  a  royal  priesthood  (Tit.  ii.  14 ;  1  Pet.  ii.  9),  and  His 
image  again  purified  in  many.  For  as  a  whole  garden  is  more 
than  a  plant,  and  the  whole  heaven  with  all  its  beauties  is 
more  glorious  than  a  star,  and  the  whole  body  more  excellent 
than  one  member,  so  also  before  God  the  whole  well-instructed 
church  is  better  than  one  well-ordered  person,  and  a  man  must 
in  general  look  not  only  on  his  own  things,  but  also  on  the 
things  of  others.  So  Christ  did,  who,  though  He  might  have 
remained  in  His  own  dignity  and  divine  glory,  not  only  hum- 
bled Himself  to  the  form  of  a  servant,  but  also,  despising  all 
shame,  endured  the  death  of  the  cross,  that  by  His  suffering 
He  might  blot  out  sin,  and  by  His  death  destroy  death." 

Thus  he  stood  a  faithful  helper  by  the  side  of  his  venerable 
and  universally  beloved  father,  who  reached  the  age  of  almost 
an  hundred  years,  and  had  exercised  the  priestly  office  for 
forty-five ;  and  on  the  death  of  his  father,  in  374,  he  delivered 
a  masterly  funeral  oration,  which  Basil  attended.'  "There 
is,"  said  he  in  this  discourse,  turning  to  his  still  living  mother, 
"  only  one  life,  to  behold  the  (divine)  life ;  there  is  only  one 
death — sin;  for  this  is  the  corruption  of  the  soul.  But  all 
else,  for  the  sake  of  which  many  exert  themselves,  is  a  dream 
which  decoys  us  from  the  true ;  it  is  a  treacherous  phantom 
of  the  soul.  When  we  think  so,  O  my  mother,  then  we  shall 
not  boast  of  life,  nor  dread  death.  For  whatsoever  evil  we 
yet  endure,  if  we  press  out  of  it  to  true  life,  if  w^e,  delivered 
from  every  change,  from  every  vortex,  from  all  satiety,  from 
all  vassalage  to  evil,  shall  there  be  with  eternal,  no  longer 
changeable  things,  as  small  lights  circling  around  the  great." 

A  short  time  after  he  had  been  invested  with  the  vacant 
bishopric,  he  retired  again,  in  375,  to  his  beloved  solitude,  and 
this  time  he  went  to  Seleucia  in  Isauria,  to  the  vicinity  of  a 
church  dedicated  to  St.  Thecla. 

There  the  painful  intelligence  reached  him  of  the  death  of 
his  beloved  Basil,  a.  d.  379.  On  this  occasion  he  wrote  to 
Basil's  brother,  Gregory  of  Kyssa :  "  Thus  also  was  it  reserved 
for  me  still  in  this  unhappy  life  to  hear  of  the  death  of  Basil 

'  Oi'at.  xviii.  'EmTacpios  els  rhy  irarepa,  -napovros  BacriKeiov  (ed.  Bened.  torn.  i. 
pp.  330-362 ;  in  Migae's  ed.  i.  981  sqq.). 


§  166.       GREGORY   NAZIANZEN.  917 

and  the  departure  of  this  holy  soul,  which  is  gone  out  from  us, 
only  to  go  in  to  the  Lord,  after  having  already  prepared  itself 
for  this  through  its  whole  life."  He  was  at  that  time  bodily 
and  mentally  very  much  depressed.  In  a  letter  to  the  rhetori- 
cian Eudoxius  he  wrote:  "You  ask,  how  it  fares  with  me. 
Very  badly.  I  no  longer  have  Basil ;  I  no  longer  have 
Csesarius ;  my  spiritual  brother,  and  my  bodily  brother.  I  can 
say  with  David,  my  father  and  my  mother  have  forsaken  me. 
My  body  is  sickly,  age  is  coming  over  my  head,  cares  become 
more  and  more  complicated,  duties  overwhelm  me,  friends  are 
unfaithful,  the  church  is  without  caj)able  pastors,  good  declines, 
evil  stalks  naked.  The  ship  is  going  in  the  night,  a  light 
nowhere,  Christ  asleep.  What  is  to  be  done  ?  O,  there  is  to 
me  but  one  escape  from  this  evil  case :  death.  But  the  here- 
after would  be  terrible  to  me,  if  I  had  to  judge  of  it  by  the 
present  state." 

But  Providence  had  appointed  him  yet  a  great  work  and 
an  exalted  position  in  the  Eastern  capital  of  the  empire.  In 
the  year  379  he  was  called  to  the  pastoral  charge  by  the  ortho- 
dox church  in  Constantinople,  which,  under  the  oppressive 
reign  of  Arianism,  was  reduced  to  a  feeble  handful ;  and  he 
was  exhorted  by  several  worthy  bishop^  to  accept  the  call. 
He  made  his  appearance  unexpectedly.  With  his  insignificant 
form  bowed  by  disease,  his  miserable  dress,  and  his  simple, 
secluded  mode  of  life,  he  at  first  entirely  disappointed  the 
splendor-loving  people  of  the  capital,  and  was  much  mocked 
and  persecuted,'  But  in  spite  of  all  he  succeeded,  by  his  pow- 
erful eloquence  and  faithful  labor,  in  building  up  the  little 
church  in  faith  and  in  Christian  life,  and  helped  the  Nicene 
doctrine  again  to  victory.  In  memory  of  this  success  his  little 
domestic  chapel  was  afterwards  changed  into  a  magnificent 
church,  and  named  Anastasia,  the  Church  of  the  KesuiTcction. 

^  Once  the  Arian  populace  even  stormed  his  church  by  night,  desecrated  the 
altar,  mixed  the  holy  wine  with  blood,  and  Gregory  but  barely  escaped  the  fury  of 
common  women  and  monks,  who  were  armed  with  clubs  and  stones.  The  next  day 
he  was  summoned  before  the  court  for  the  tumult,  but  so  happily  defended  himself, 
that  the  occurrence  heightened  the  triumph  of  his  just  cause.  Probably  from  this 
circumstance  he  afterwards  received  the  honorary  title  of  confessor.  See  Ullmann. 
p.  116. 


918  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

People  of  all  classes  crowded  to  his  discourses,  whicli  were 
mainly  devoted  to  the  vindication  of  the  Godhead  of  Christ 
and  to  the  Trinity,  and  at  the  same  time  earnestly  inculcated 
a  holy  walk  befitting  the  true  faith.  Even  the  famous  Jerome, 
at  that  time  already  fifty  years  old,  came  from  Syria  to  Con- 
stantinople to  hear  these  discom'ses,  and  took  private  instruc- 
tion of  Gregory  in  the  interpretation  of  Scriptm-e.  He  grate- 
fully calls  him  his  preceptor  and  catechist. 

The  victory  of  the  Nicene  faith,  which  Gregory  had  thus 
inwardly  promoted  in  the  imperial  city,  was  outwardly  com- 
pleted by  the  celebrated  edict  of  the  new  emperor  Theodosius, 
in  February,  380.  When  the  emperor,  on  the  24th  of  Decem- 
ber of  that  year,  entered  Constantinople,  he  deposed  the  Arian 
bishop,  Demophilus,  with  all  his  clergy,  and  transferred  the 
cathedral  church '  to  Gregory  with  the  words :  "  This  temple 
God  by  our  hand  intrusts  to  thee  as  a  reward  for  thy  pains." 
The  people  tumultuously  demanded  him  for  bishop,  but  he 
decidedly  refused.  And  in  fact  he  was  not  yet  released  from 
his  bishopric  of  IS^azianzum  or  Sasima  (though  upon  the  latter 
he  had  never  formally  entered) ;  he  could  be  released  only  by 
a  synod. 

When  Theodosius,  for  the  formal  settlement  of  the  theolog- 
ical controversies,  called_^  the  renowned  ecumenical  council  in 
May,  381,  Gregory  was  elected  by  this  council  itself  bishop  of 
Constantinople,  and,  amidst  great  festivities,  was  inducted  into 
the  office.  In  virtue  of  this  dignity  he  held  for  a  time  the 
presidency  of  the  council. 

When  the  Egyptian  and  Macedonian  bishops  arrived,  they 
disputed  the  validity  of  his  election,  because,  according  to  the 
fifteenth  canon  of  the  council  of  Nice,  he  coidd  not  be  trans- 
ferred from  his  bishopric  of  Sasima  to  another;  though  their 
real  reason  was,  that  the  election  had   been  made  without 

'  Not  the  church  of  St.  Sophia,  as  Tillemont  assumes,  but  the  church  of  the 
Apostles,  as  Ullmann,  p.  223,  supposes ;  for  Gregory  never  names  the  former,  but 
mentions  the  latter  repeatedly,  and  that  as  the  church  in  which  he  himself  preached. 
Constantine  built  both,  but  made  the  church  of  the  Apostles  the  more  magnificent, 
and  chose  it  for  his  own  burial  place  (Euseb.  Vita  Const,  iv.  58-60) ;  St.  Sophia 
afterwards  became  under  Justinian  the  most  glorious  monument  of  the  later  Greek 
architecture,  and  the  cathedral  of  Constantinople. 


§   166.       GEEGORY   NAZIANZEN.  919 

them,  aud  that  Gregory  would  i^robably  be  distasteful  to  them 
as  a  bold  preacher  of  righteousness.  This  deeply  wounded 
him.  He  was  soon  disgusted,  too,  with  the  operations  of 
party  passions  in  the  council,  and  resigned  with  the  following 
remarkable  declaration : 

"Whatever  this  assembly  may  hereafter  determine  con- 
cerning me,  I  would  fain  raise  your  mind  beforehand  to  some- 
thing far  higher :  I  pray  you  now,  be  one,  and  join  yourselves 
in  love !  Must  we  always  be  only  derided  as  infallible,  and  be 
animated  only  by  one  thing,  the  spirit  of  strife?  Give  each 
other  the  hand  fraternally.  But  I  will  be  a  second  Jonah.  I 
will  give  myself  for  the  salvation  of  our  ship  (the  church), 
though  I  am  innocent  of  the  storm.  Let  the  lot  fall  upon  me, 
and  cast  me  into  the  sea.  A  hosj^itable  fish  of  the  deep  will 
receive  me.  Tliis  shall  be  the  beginning  of  your  harmony.  I 
reluctantly  ascended  the  episcopal  chair,  and  gladly  I  now 
come  down.  Even  my  weak  body  advises  me  this.  One  debt 
only  have  I  to  pay :  death ;  this  I  owe  to  God.  But,  O  my 
Trinity !  for  Thy  sake  only  am  I  sad.  Shalt  Thou  have  an 
able  man,  bold  and  zealous  to  vindicate  Thee?  Farewell,  and 
remember  my  labors  and  my  pains." 

In  the  celebrated  valedictory  which  he  delivered  before  the 
assembled  bislioj)s,  he  gives  account  of  his  administration; 
depicts  the  former  humiliation  and  the  present  triumph  of  the 
l^icene  faith  in  Constantinople,  and  his  own  part  in  this  great 
change,  for  which  he  begs  repose  as  his  only  reward ;  exhorts 
his  hearers  to  harmony  and  love ;  and  then  takes  leave  of  Con- 
stantinople and  in  particular  of  his  beloved  church,  with  this 
address : 

"  And  now,  farewell,  my  Anastasia,  who  bearest  a  so  holy 
name ;  thou  hast  exalted  again  our  faith,  which  once  was  de- 
spised ;  thou,  our  common  field  of  victory,  thou  new  Shiloh, 
where  we  first  established  again  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  after 
it  had  been  carried  about  for  forty  years  on  our  wandering  in 
the  wilderness." 

Though  this  voluntary  resignation  of  so  high  a  post  j)i"0- 
ceeded  in  part  from  sensitiveness  and  irritation,  it  is  still  an 
honorable  testimony  to  the  character  of  Gregory  in  contrast 


920  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

with  the  many  clergy  of  his  time  who  shrank  from  no  intrigues 
and  by-ways  to  get  possession  of  such  dignities.  He  left  Con- 
stantinople in  June,  381,  and  spent  the  remaining  years  of  his 
life  mostly  in  solitude  on  his  paternal  estate  of  Arianzus  in  the 
vicinity  of  Nazianzum,  in  religious  exercises  and  literary  pur- 
suits. Yet  he  continued  to  operate  through  numerous  epistles 
upon  the  aflairs  of  the  church,  and  took  active  interest  in  the 
welfare  and  sufferings  of  the  men  around  him.  The  nearer 
death  approached,  the  more  he  endeavored  to  prepare  himself 
for  it  by  contemplation  and  rigid  ascetic  practice,  that  he 
"  might  be,  and  might  more  and  more  become,  in  truth  a  pure 
mirror  of  God  and  of  divine  things ;  might  already  in  hope 
enjoy  the  treasures  of  the  future  world ;  might  walk  with  the 
angels ;  might  already  forsake  the  earth,  while  yet  walking 
upon  it ;  and  might  be  trans23orted  into  higher  regions  by  the 
Spirit."  In  his  poems  he  describes  himself,  living  solitary  in 
the  clefts  of  the  rocks  among  the  beasts,  going  about  without 
shoes,  content  with  one  rough  garment,  and  sleeping  upon  the 
ground  covered  with  a  sack,  rjie  died  in  390  or  391 ;  the  par- 
ticular cii'cumstances  of  his  death  being  ^SW  unknown.  His 
bones  were  afterwards  brought  to  Constantinople ;  and  they 
are  now  shown  at  Rome  and  Venice. 

Among  the  works  of  Gregory  stand  pre-eminent  his  five 
Theological  Orations  in  defence  of  the  I^icene  doctrine  against 
the  Eunomians  and  Macedonians,  which  he  delivered  in  Con- 
stantinople, and  which  won  for  him  the  honorary  title  of  the 
Theologian  (in  the  narrower  sense,  i.  e.,  vindicator  of  the  deity 
of  the  Logos).'  His  other  orations  (forty-five  in  all)  are  de- 
voted to  the  memory  of  distinguished  martyrs,  friends,  and 
kindi-ed,  to  the  ecclesiastical  festivals,  and  to  public  events  or 
his  own  fortunes.  Two  of  them  are  bitter  attacks  on  Julian 
after  his  death.*  They  are  not  founded  on  particular  texts, 
and  have  no  strictly  logical  order  and  connection, 

^  Hence  called  also  \(>-^oi  &eo\oytKoi,  Orationes  theologicae.  They  are  Orat. 
xxvii.-xxxi.  in  the  Bened.  ed.  torn.  i.  pp.  487-577  (in  Migne,  torn.  ii.  9  sqq.),  and 
in  the  Bibliotheca  Patrum  GrEec.  dogmatica  of  Thilo,  vol.  ii.  pp.  366-537. 

"^  InvectivjB,  Orat.  iv.  et  v.  in  the  Bened.  ed.  torn.  i.  73-176  (in  Migne's  ed.  torn. 
i.  pp.  531-722).  His  horror  of  Julian  misled  him  even  to  eulogize  the  Arian  empe- 
ror Constantius,  to  whom  his  brother  was  physician. 


''  -^^  'r^r;,,   ^j  „'-/.,.,  ^/-/'^.  ^''-'■'.  "^A---  "^--'^ 


<;-£-«• 


§    167.       DIDYMU3    OF    ALEXAXDKIA.  921 

He  is  the  greatest  orator  of  the  Greek  church,  -with  the 
exception  perhaps  of  Chrysostom  ;  but  his  oratory  often  degen- 
erates into  arts  of  persuasion,  and  is  full  of  labored  ornamenta- 
tion and  rhetorical  extravagances,  -vrhich  are  in  the  spirit  of  his 
age,  but  in  violation  of  healthful,  natural  taste.  '^ 

As  a  poet  he  holds  a  subordinate,  though  respectable  place. 
He  vrrote  poetry  only  in  his  later  life,  and  wrote  it  not  from 
native  impulse,  as  the  bird  sings  among  the  branches,  but  in 
the  strain  of  moral  reflection,  upon  his  own  life,  or  upon 
doctrinal  and  moral  themes.  Many  of  his  orations  are  poetical, 
many  of  his  poems  are  prosaic.  Xot  one  of  his  odes  or  hymns 
passed  into  use  in  the  church.  Yet  some  of  his  smaller  pieces, 
apothegms,  epigrams,  and  epitaphs,  are  very  beautiful,  and 
betray  noble  affections,  deep  feeling,  and  a  high  order  of  talent 
and  cultivation.'^ 

We  have,  finally,  two  hundred  and  forty-two  (or  244)  Epis- 
tles from  Gregory,  which  are  important  to  the  history  of  the 
time,  and  in  some  cases  very  graceful  and  interesting. 

§  167.     Didymus  of  Alexandria. 

I.  DiDTMi  Alexaxdedsi  Opera  omnia :  accedunt  S.  Amphilochii  et  Xec- 

tarii  scripta  quae  supersunt  Greece,  accurante  et  denuo  recognoscente 
J.  P.  Migne.  Petit-Montronge  (Paris),  1858.  (Tom.  xxxix.  of  the 
Patrologia  Grajca.) 

II.  HiEEoxTiirs:  De  viris  illustr.  c.  109,  and  Prooem.  in  Hoseam.     Scat- 

tered accounts  in  Rufists,  Palladius,  Soceates,  Sozomex,  and  Theo- 

DOEET.     Tillemoxt:  Memoires,  x.  164,     Fabbicits:   BibL  Gr.  torn. 

^--.^  ix.  269  sqq.  ed.  Harless  (also  in  Migne's  ed.  of  the  Opera,  pp.  131-140). 

2  /  His  poems  fill  together  with  the  Epistles  the  whole  second  tome  of  the  magnifi- 
cept  Benedictine  edition,  so  delightful  to  handle,  which  was  published  at  Paris,  1842 
(edente  et  curante  D.  A.  B.  Caillau),  and  vols.  iii.  and  iv.  of  iligne's  reprint.  They 
are  divided  by  the  Bened.  editor  into :  I.  Poemata  theologica  (dogmatica,  moraha) ; 
n.  historica  (a.  autobiographical,  quae  spectant  ipsum  Gregorium,  irepl  IoktoP,  De 
seipso ;  and  b.  irepl  ruv  eTepuv,  quae  spectant  ahos) ;  III.  epitaphia ;  IV.  epigrammata ; 
and  V.  a  long  tragedy,  Chnstus  paliens,  with  Christ,  the  Holy  Virgin,  Joseph, 
Theologus,  Mary  Magdalene,  Nicodemus,  Xuntius,  and  PUate  as  actors.  This  is  the 
first  attempt  at  a  Christian  drama.  The  order  of  the  poems,  as  well  as  the  Orations 
and  Epistles,  differs  in  the  Benediitine  from  that  of  the  older  editions.  See  the 
comparative  table  in  tom.  ii.  p.  xv.  sqq.  One  of  the  finest  passages  in  his  poems  is 
his  lamentation  over  the  temporary  suspension  of  his  friendship  with  Basil,  quoted 
abovewjj^OPl. 


^ 


922  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

SciTEOECKH :  Churcli  History,  vii.  ^■ir-87.     Guekicke  :  De  scliola  Alex- 
andrina.     Hal.  1824. 

DiDYMUs,  the  last  great  teaclier  of  the  Alexandrian  cate- 
chetical school,  and  a  faitlifiil  follower  of  Origen,  was  born 
probably  at  Alexandria  about  the  year  309.  Though  he  be- 
came in  his  foui'th  year  entirely  blind,  and  for  this  reason  has 
been  surnamed  Ccecus,  yet  by  extraordinary  industry  he  gained 
comprehensive  and  thorough  knowledge  in  philosophy,  rhetoric, 
and  mathematics.  He  learned  to  write  by  means  of  wooden 
tablets  in  which  the  characters  were  engraved ;  and  he  became 
so  familiar  with  the  Holy  Scriptures  by  listening  to  the  church 
lessons,  that  he  knew  them  almost  all  by  heart. 

Athanasius  nominated  him  teacher.in  the  theological  school, 
where  he  zealously  labored  for  nearly  sixty  years.  Even  men 
like  Jerome,  Rufinus,  Palladius,  and  Isidore,  sat  at  his  feet 
with  admiration.  He  was  moreover  an  enthusiastic  advocate 
of  ascetic  life,  and  stood  in  high  esteem  with  the  Egyptian 
anchorites;  with  St.  Anthony  in  particular,  who  congratulated 
him,  that,  though  blind  to  the  perishable  world  of  sense,  he 
was  endowed  with  the  eye  of  an  angel  to  behold  the  mysteries 
of  God.     He  died  at  a  great  age,  in  universal  favor,  in  395. 

Didymus  was  thoroughly  orthodox  in  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity,  and  a  discerning  opponent  of  the  Arians,  but  at  the 
same  time  a  great  venerator  of  Origen,  and  a  participant  of  his 
peculiar  views  concerning  the  pre-existence  of  souls,  and  prob- 
ably concerning  final  restoration.  For  this  reason  he  was  long 
after  his  death  condemned  with  intolerant  zeal  by  several  gen- 
eral councils.* 

We  have  from  him  a  book  On  the  Holy  Ghost,  translated 
by  Jerome  into  Latin,  in  which  he  advocates,  with  much  dis- 
crimination, and  in  simple,  biblical  style,  the  consubstantiality 
of  the  Spirit  with  the  Father,  against  the  Semi- Arians  and 
Fueumatomachi  of  his  time;^  and  three  books  on  the  Trinity, 

'  First  at  the  fifth  ecumenical  council  in  553.  The  sixth  council  in  680  stigma- 
tized him  as  a  defender  of  the  abominable  doctrine  of  Origen,  who  revived  the 
heathen  fables  of  the  transmigration  of  souls ;  and  the  seventh  repeated  this  in 
"787. 

■■^  Didymus  wrote  only  oiie  book  De  Spiritu  Sancto  (see  Jerome,  De  viris  illustr. 


§   168.      CYEIL   OF  JERUSALEM.  923 

in  tlie  Greek  original.'  lie  wrote  also  a  brief  treatise  against 
the  Manichgeans.  Of  his  numerous  exegetical  works  we  have 
a  commentary  on  the  Catholic  Epistles/  and  large  fragments, 
in  part  uncertain,  of  commentaries  on  the  Psalms,  Job,  Prov- 
erbs, and  some  Pauline  Epistles.' 


§  168.     Cyril  of  JerusaleTn. 

I.  S.  CTRiLLrs,  archiepisc.  Hierosolymitanus :  Opera  quaa  exstant  omnia, 
&c.,  cnra  et  studio  Ant.  Aug.  Touttaei  {Touttee}^  presb.  et  monachi 
Bened.  e  congreg.  S.  Mauri.  Paris,  1720.  1  vol.  fol.  (edited  after  Tout- 
tee's  death  by  the  Benedictine  D.  Prud.  Maranus.  Comp.  therewith  ,j^,.  x  , 
Sal.  Deyling :  Cyrilhis  Eieros.  a  corruptelis  Touttgei  aliorumque  pur-  =  ^s-  ^ 
gatus.  Lips.  1728).  Reprint,  Venice,  1763.  A  new  ed.  by  \S[Tgne,  >-  -^^  ^ 
Petit-Montrouge,  1857  (Patrol.  Gr.  torn,  xxxiii.,  which  contains  also 
the  writings  of  Apollinaris  of  Laodicea,  Diodor  of  Tarsus,  and  others). 
The  Catecheses  of  Cyril  have  also  been  several  times  edited  separately, 
and  translated  into  modern  languages.  Engl,  transl.  in  the  Oxford 
Library  of  the  Fathers,  vol.  ii.  Oxf.  1839. 

IL  EpiPHA^nrs:  H^r.  Ix.  20;  Ixxiii.  23,  27,  37.  Hieeontmus:  De  viris 
illustr.  c.  112.  Socrates:  H.  E.  ii.  40,  42,  45;  iii,  20.  Sozomex: 
iv.  5,  17,  20,  22,  25.  Theodoeet:  H.  E.  ii.  26,  27;  iii.  14;  v.  8. 
The  Dissertationes  Cyrillianae  de  vita  et  scriptis  S.  Cyr.  &c.  in  the 
Benedictine  edition  of  the  Opera,  and  in  Migne's  reprint,  pp.  31-322. 
The  Acta  SAxcTOEUir,  and  Butlee,  sub  mense  Martii  18.  Tillemont  : 
torn.  viii.  pp.  428-439,  779-787.    Also  the  accounts  in  the  well-known 

c.  135 :  librum  unum  de  Sp.  S.  Didjmi  quern  in  Latinum  transtuli).  The  division 
into  three  books  is  of  later  date. 

'  Discovered  and  edited  by  Job.  Aloys,  ilingarelli,  at  Bologna,  1769,  with  a 
Latin  translation  and  learned  treatises  on  the  life,  doctrine,  and  writings  of  Didy- 
mus.  (Dr.  Herzog,  Encykl.  iii.  p.  384,  confounds  this  edition  with  a  preliminary 
advertisement  by  the  brother  Ferdinand  Mingarelli :  Yeterum  testimonia  de  Didymo 
Ales,  coeco,  ex  quibus  tres  Hbri  de  Trinitate  nuper  detecti  eidem  asseruntur,  Horn, 
nei.  The  title  of  the  work  itself  is:  Didymus,  De  Trinitate  libri  tres,  nunc  pri- 
mum  ex  Passioneiano  codice  Gr.  editi,  Latine  conversi,  ac  notis  illustrati  a  D.  Job.  ■ 
Aloys.  Mingarellio,  Bononise,  1769,  fol.) 

*  The  Latin  version  is  found  in  the  libraries  of  the  church  fathers.  The  original 
Greek  has  been  edited  by  Dr.  Fr.  Llcke  from  Muscovite  manuscripts  in  four 
academic  dissertations:  Quaestiones  ac  vindicis  Didymianse,  sive  Didj-mi  Alex, 
enarratio  in  Epistolas  Catholicas  Latina,  Gkeco  exemplari  magnam  partem  e  GrjEcis 
scholiis  restituta,  Getting.  1829-32.  Reprinted  in  Migne's  edition  of  Opera  Didymi, 
pp.  1731-1818. 

^  In  Migne's  ed.  p.  1109  sqq. 


924:  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

patristic  works  of  Dupin,  Ceilliek,  Cave,  Fabeioius.     Scheockh: 
Part  xii.  pp.  369^76. 

Cteillus,  presbyter  and,  after  350,  bishop  of  Jenisalem, 
was  extensively  involved  during  his  public  life  in  the  Arian 
controversies.  His  metropolitan,  Acacius  of  Caesarea,  an 
Arian,  who  had  elevated  him  to  the  episcopal  chair,  fell  out 
with  him  over  the  Nicene  faith  and  on  a  question  of  jurisdic- 
tion, and  deposed  him  at  a  council  in  357.  His  deposition 
was  confirmed  by  an  Arian  council  at  Constantinople  in  360. 

After  the  death  of  tlie  emperor  Constantius  he  was  restored 
to  his  bishopric  in  361,  and  in  363  his  embittered  adversary, 
Acacius,  converted  to  the  orthodox  faith.  When  Julian  en- 
couraged the  Jews  to  rebuild  the  temple,  Cyril  is  said  to  have 
predicted  the  miscarriage  of  the  undertaking  from  the  prophe- 
cies of  Daniel  and  of  Christ,  and  he  was  justified  by  the  result. 
Under  the  Arian  emperor  Yalens  he  was  again  deposed  and 
banished,  with  all  the  other  orthodox  bishops,  till  he  finally, 
under  Theodosius,  was  permitted  to  return  to  Jerusalem  in 
379,  to  devote  himself  undisturbed  to  the  supervision  and 
restoration  of  his  sadly  distracted  church  until  his  death. 

He  attended  the  ecumenical  council  in  Constantinople  in 
381,  which  confirmed  him  in  his  ofiice,  and  gave  him  the  great 
praise  of  having  suffered  much  from  the  Arians  for  the  faith. 
He  died  in  386,  with  his  title  to  office  and  his  orthodoxy  uni- 
versally acknowledged,  clear  of  all  the  suspicions  which  many 
had  gathered  from  his  friendship  with  Semi-Arian  bishops 
during  his  first  exile.' 

From  Cp'il  we  have  an  important  theological  work,  com- 
plete, in  the  Greek  original :  his  twenty -three  Catecheses.'' 
The  work  consists  of  connected  religious  lectures  or  homilies, 
which  he  delivered  while  presbyter  about  the  year  347,  in  pre- 
paring a  class  of  catechumens  for  baptism.  It  follows  that 
form  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  or  the  Eule  of  Faith  which  was 
then  in  use  in  the  churches  of  Palestine,  and  which  agrees  in 

'  His  sentiments  on  the  lioly  Trinity  are  discussed  at  length  in  the  third  pre- 
liminary dissertation  of  the  Bened.  editor  (in  Migne's  ed.  p.  167  sqq.). 

^  KaT7jx7)o"€t5  <pu>Ti(oiJ.tvcov  {oT  ySaTTTiC.'o^eVojj'),  Catecheses  illummaudorum.  They 
are  preceded  by  a  orocatechesis. 


168.      CYKIL   OF  JERUSALEM.  925 


>f. 


lH-v\s. 


/L 


all  essential  points  with  the  Eoman-;-  it  supports  the  various 
articles  with  passages  of  Scripture,  and  defends  them  against  the 
heretical  perversions  of  his  time.  The  last  five,  called  the  Mys- 
tagogic  Catecheses,'  are  addressed  to  newly  baptized  persons, 
and  are  of  importance  in  the  doctrine  of  the  sacraments  and 
the  history  of  liturgy.  In  these  he  explains  the  ceremonies 
then  customary  at  baptism :  Exorcism,  the  putting  off  of  gar- 
ments, anointing,  the  short  confession,  triple  immersion,  con- 
firmation by  the  anointing  oil ;  also  the  nature  and  ritual  of 
the  holy  Supper,  in  which  he  sees  a  mystical  vital  union  of 
believers  with  Christ,  and  concerning  which  he  uses  terms 
verging  at  least  upon  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation.  In 
connection  with  this  he  gives  us  a  full  account  of  the  earliest 
eucharistic  liturgy,  which  coincides  in  all  essential  points  with 
such  other  liturgical  remains  of  the  Eastern  church,  as  the 
Apostolic  Constitutions  and  the  Liturgy  of  St.  James. 

The  Catecheses  of  Cyril  are  the  first  example  of  a  popular 
compend  of  religion ;  for  the  catechetical  work  of  Gregory  of 
Nyssa  {Xoofos  KaTr]')(7]TiKo<i  6  fieyasi)  is  designed  not  so  much  for 
catechumens,  as  for  catechists  and  those  intending  to  become 
teachers. 

Besides  several  homilies  and  tracts  of  very  doubtful 
genuineness,  a  homily  on  the  healing  of  the  crij)ple  at  Bethes- 
da,'  and  a  remarkable  letter  to  the  emperor  Constantius  of  the 
year  351,  are  also  ascribed  to  Cyril.'  In  the  letter  he  relates 
to  the  emperor  the  miraculous  appearance  of  a  luminous  cross 
extending  from  Golgotha  to  a  point  over  the  mount  of  Olives 
(mentioned  also  by  Socrates,  Sozomen,  and  others),  and  calls 
upon  him  to  praise  the  "  consubstantial  Trinity."  * 

*  KaTTjxvo'eii  f^vaTayayiKal.  The  name  is  connected  with  the  mysterious  prac- 
tices of  the  disciplina  arcani  of  the  early  church.  Comp.  the  conclusion  of  the 
first  Mystagogic  Catechesis,  c.  11  (Migne,  p.  1015).  The  mystagogic  lectures  are 
also  separately  numbered.  The  first  is  a  general  exhortation  to  the  baptized  on  1 
Pet.  V.  8 ;  the  second  treats  De  baptismo ;  the  third,  De  chrismate;  the  fourth,  De 
corpore  et  sanguine  Christi ;  the  fifth,  De  sacra  liturgia  et  communione. 

^  Homilia  in  paralyticum,  John  v.  2-16  (in  Migne's  ed.  pp.  1131-1158). 
^  Ep.  ad  Constantium  imper.     De  vise  Hierosolymis  lucidae  crucis  signo,  pp. 
1154-1178. 

*  TV  ayiav  Kol  o/j-oovcnov  TpidSa,  rhv  aXri^ivhy  Qdv  W**',  V  "'pe'rei  iracra  So^a 
eis  rovs  aluivas  rSiv  alwvuv. 


926  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-690. 


§  169.     Epvphanius. 

I.  S.  EpiPHAifius :  Opera  omnia,  Gr.  et  Lat.,  Dionysius  Fefavius  ex  veteri- 

bus  libris  recensuit,  Latine  vertit  et  animadversionibus  illustravit. 
Paris,  1622,  2  vols.  fol.  The  same  edition  reprinted  Tvith  additions  at 
Cologne  (or  rather  at  Leipsic),  1682,  and  by  J.  P.  Migne^  Petit-Mont- 
rouge,  1858,  in  3  vols,  (torn,  xli.-xliii.  of  Migne's  Patrologia  Grseca). 
The  Uavapiov  or  Panaria  of  Epiphanius,  together  -vvith  his  Anacepha- 
Issosis,  with  the  Latin  version  of  both  by  Petavius,  has  also  been  sep- 
arately edited  by  Fr.  OeTiler^  as  tom.  ii.  and  iii.  of  his  Corpns  hsereseo- 
logicum,  Berol.  1859-'61.  (Part  second  of  tom.  iii.  contains  the 
Animadversiones  of  Petavius^  and  A.  Jahn^s  Symbolse  ad  emendanda 
et  illustranda  S.  Epiphanii  Panaria.) 

II,  HiEEoxTiius :  De  viris  illnstr.  c.  114,  and  in  several  of  his  Epistles 

relating  to  the  Origenistic  controversies,  Epp.  66  sqq.  ed.  Vallarsi. 
Socrates:  Hist.  Eccl.  1.  vi.  c.  10-14.  SozoiiEN:  H.  E.  viii.  11-15. 
Old  biographies,  full  of  fables,  see  in  Migne's  edition,  tom.  i,,  and  in 
Petav.  ii.  318  sqq.  The  Vita  Epiph.  in  the  Acta  Sanctoetjm  for  May, 
tom.  iii.  die  12,  pp.  36-49  (also  reprinted  in  Migne's  ed,  tom.  i.). 
TiLLEMOXT :  Memoires,  tom.  x.  pp.  484-521,  and  the  notes,  pp.  802- 
809.  Fe.  Aem.  Geevaise:  L'histoire  et  la  vie  de  saint  Epiphane. 
Par.  1738.  Fabeioitjs:  Biblioth.  Grreca,  ed.  Harless,  tom.  viii.  p,  255 
sqq,  (also  reprinted  in  Migne's  ed.  of  Epiph.  i.  1  sqq,).  "W".  Cave  :  Lives 
of  the  Fathers,  iii.  207-236  (new  Osf.  ed,),  Scheockh  :  Th.  x.  3  ff. 
R.  Adelb.  Lipsrcs:  Zur  Quellenkritik  des  Epiphanios.  Wien,  1865. 
(A  critical  analysis  of  the  older  history  of  heresies,  in  Epiph.  hser.  13- 
57,  with  special  reference  to  the  Gnostic  systems.) 

Epiphanius,'  ^vllo  achieved  his  great  fame  mainly  by  his 
learned  and  intolerant  zeal  for  orthodoxy,  was  born  near  Eleu- 
theropolis  in  Palestine,  between  310  and  320,  and  died  at  sea, 
at  a  very  advanced  age,  on  his  way  bach  from  Constantinople 
to  Cyprus,  in  403.  According  to  an  uncertain,  though  not 
improbable  tradition,  he  was  the  son  of  poor  Jewish  parents, 
and  was  educated  by  a  rich  Jewish  lawyer,  until  in  his  sixteenth 
year  he  embraced  the  Christian  religion,'' — the  first  example, 

*  There  are  several  prominent  ecclesiastical  writers  of  that  name.  Compare  a 
list  of  them  in  Fabricius,  1.  c. 

^  See  the  biography  of  his  pupil  John,  ch.  2,  in  Migne's  ed.  i,  25  sqq.  Cave 
accepts  this  story,  and  it  receives  some  support  from  the  Palestinian  origin  of  Epi- 
phanius, and  from  his  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  language,  which  was  then  so  rare 
*v,„l  T,   ,. . ,..— |.~^^,^pjj..^[i^^l,P-j,^^„  Epiphanius  mkm  possessed  it. 


§   169.      EPIPHANIUS.  927 

after  St.  Paul,  of  a  learned  Je"wisli  convert  and  the  only  exam- 
ple among  the  ancient  fathers ;  for  all  the  other  fathers  were 
either  born  of  Christian  parents,  or  converted  from  heathenism. 

He  spent  several  years  in  severe  ascetic  exercises  among 
the  hermits  of  Egypt,  and  then  became  abbot  of  a  convent 
near  Eleiitheropolis.  In  connection  with  his  teacher  and 
friend  Hilarion  he  labored  zealously  for  the  spread  of  monasti- 
cism  in  Palestine.' 

In  the  year  367  he  was  unanimously  elected  by  the  people 
and  the  monks  bishop  of  Salamis  (Constantia),  the  capital  of 
the  island  of  Cyprus.  Here  he  wrote  his  works  against  the 
heretics,  and  took  active  part  in  the  doctrinal  controversies  of 
his  age.  He  made  it  his  principal  business  to  destroy  the  in- 
fluence of  the  arch-heretic  Origen,  for  whom  he  had  contracted 
a  thorough  hatred  from  the  anchorites  of  Egypt.  On  this 
mission  he  travelled  in  his  old  age  to  Palestine  and  Constan- 
tinople, and  died  in  the  same  year  in  which  Chrysostom  was 
deposed  and  banished,  an  innocent  sacrifice  on  the  opposite 
side  in  the  violent  Origenistic  controversies.^ 

Epiphanius  was  revered  even  by  his  cotemporaries  as  a 
saint  and  as  a  patriarch  of  orthodoxy.  Once  as  he  passed 
through  the  streets  of  Jerusalem  in  company  with  bishop 
John,  mothers  brought  their  children  to  him  that  he  might 
bless  them,  and  the  people  crowded  around  him  to  kiss  his 
feet  and  to  touch  the  hem  of  his  garment.  After  his  death  his 
name  was  surrounded  by  a  halo  of  miraculous  legends.  He 
was  a  man  of  earnest,  monastic  piety,  and  of  sincere  but 
illiberal  zeal  for  orthodoxy.  His  good  nature  easily  allowed 
him  to  be  used  as  an  instrument  for  the  passions  of  others,  and 
his  zeal  was  not  according  to  knowledge.  He  is  the  patriarch 
of  heresy-hunters.  He  identified  Christianity  with  monastic 
piety  and  ecclesiastical  orthodoxy,  and  considered  it  the  great 
mission  of  his  life  to  pursue  the  thousand-headed  hydra  of 
heresy  into  all  its  hiding  places.  Occasionally,  however,  his 
fiery  zeal    consumed   what  was   subsequently  considered   an 

'  He  composed  a  eulogy  on  Hilarion,  which,  with  some  others  of  his  works,  is 
lost. 

^  Comp.  above,  §§  133  and  134. 

O 
\ 


928  THIKD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

essential  part  of  piety  and  orthodoxy.  Sharing  the  primitive 
Christian  abhorrence  of  images,  he  destroyed  a  picture  of 
Christ  or  some  saint  in  a  village  church  in  Palestine;  and  at 
times  he  violated  ecclesiastical  order. 

The  learning  of  Epiphanius  was  extensive,  but  ill  digested. 
He  understood  five  languages :  Hebrew,  Syriac,  Egyptian, 
Greek,  and  a  little  Latin.  Jerome,  who  himself  knew  but 
three  languages,  though  he  knew  these  far  better  than  Epi- 
phanius, called  him  the  Five-tongued,'  and  Rufinus  reproach- 
fully says  of  him  that  he  considered  it  his  sacred  duty  as  a 
wandering  preacher  to  slander  the  great  Origen  in  all  lan- 
guages and  nations.^  He  was  lacking  in  knowledge  of  the 
world  and  of  men,  in  sound  judgment,  and  in  critical  discern- 
ment. He  was  possessed  of  a  boundless  credulity,  now  almost 
proverbial,  causing  innumerable  errors  and  contradictions  in 
his  writings.  His  style  is  entirely  destitute  of  beauty  or 
elegance. 

Still  his  works  are  of  considerable  value  as  a  storehouse  of 
the  history  of  ancient  heresies  and  of  patristic  polemics.  They 
are  the  following : 

1.  The  Anchor,^  a  defence  of  Christian  doctrine,  especially 
of  the  doctrines  of  the  Trinity,  the  incarnation,  and  the  resur- 
rection ;  in  one  hundred  and  twenty-one  chapters.  He  com- 
posed this  treatise  a.  d.  373,  at  the  entreaty  of  clergymen  and 
monks,  as  a  stay  for  those  who  are  tossed  about  upon  the  sea 
by  heretics  and  devils.  In  it  he  gives  two  creeds,  a  shorter 
and  a  longer,  which  show  that  the  addition  made  by  the  sec- 

'  neuTayXcDTTOS. 

'  Hieron.  Apol.  adv.  Rufinum,  1.  iii.  c.  6  (Opera,  torn.  ii.  537,  ed.  Vail.)  and  1.  ii. 
21  and  22  (torn.  ii.  515).  Jerome  says  that  "papa"  Epiphanius  had  read  the  six 
thousand  [?]  books  of  Origen,  and  in  his  apology  against  Rufinus  and  in  his  letters 
he  speaks  of  him  with  great  respect  as  a  confederate  in  the  war  upon  Origen.  He 
acknowledges,  however,  that  his  statements  need  an  accurate  and  careful  verifica- 
tion. In  his  Liber  de  viris  illustribus,  cap.  114,  he  disposes  of  him  very  summarily 
with  two  sentences:  "Epiphanius,  Cypri  Salamina;  episcopus,  scripsit  adversus 
omnes  h^ereses  libros,  et  multa  alia,  quae  ab  eruditis  propter  res,  a  simphcioribus 
propter  verba  lectitantur.  Superest  usque  hodie,  et  in  extrema  jam  scnectute  varia 
cudit  opera." 

'  'AyKvpooT69,  Ancoratus.  or  Ancora  fidei  catholicae,  in  torn.  ii.  of  Petavius ;  torn, 
iii.  11-236  of  Migne.  A 


I 


•aX» 


§   169.      EPIPHANIUS.  929 

ond  ecumenical  council  to  the  Nicene  symbol,  in  respect  to 

the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  the  church,  had  already 

been  several  years  in  use  in  the  church.'     For  the   shorter 

symbol,  which,  according  to  Epiphanius,  had  to  be  said  at 

baptism  by  every  orthodox  catechumen  in  the  East,  from  the 

council  of  Nic83a  to  the  tenth  year  of  Valentinian  and  Yalens 

(a.  d.  373),  is  precisely  the  same  as  the  Constantinopolitan ; 

and   the  longer  is  even  more  specific  against  Apollinarian- 

ism  and  Macedonianism,  in  the  article  concerning  the  Holy 

Ghost.     Both  contain  the  anathemas  of  the^^!JTicene  Creed ;  the  a  6^f^* 

longer  giving  them  in  an  extended  form.jvv/C  <u,  <x^^>»iArK  ^  ^   ^t£.wm#;fe 

2.  The  PANAEitrM,  or  Medicine-chest,^  which  contains  anti-  AHA^vt'cfcA^T 
dotes  for  the  poison  of  all  heresies.     This  is  his  chief  work,  ^-    4vt£Pa^ 
composed  between  the  years  37-1:  and  377,  in  answer  to  solici-   ft7  J^cuvA, 
tations  from  many  quarters.     And  it  is  the  chief  hereseological 
work  of  the  ancient  chm-ch.     It  is  more  extensive  than  any  of 
the  similar  works  of  Justin  Martyr,  Irenseus,  and  Hippolytus 
before  it,  and  of  Philastrius  (or  Philastrus),  Augustine,  Theod- 
oret,   pseudo-Tertullian,   pseudo- Jerome,   and  the   author  of 
Prsedestinatus,  after  it.'     Epiphanius  brought  together,  with 
the  diligence  of  an  unwearied  compiler,  but  without  logical  or 
chronological  arrangement,  everything  he  could  learn  from 
written  or  oral  sources  concerning  heretics  from  the  beginning 
of  the  world  down  to  his  time.     But  his  main  concern  is  the 
antidote  to  heresy,  the  doctrinal  refutations,  in  which  he  be- 
lieved himself  to  be  doing  God  and  the  church  great  service, 

*  Anc.  n.  119  and  120  (torn.  iii.  23  sqq.  ed.  Migne). 

'  Uavdpiov,  Panarium  (Panaria),  sive  Arcula,  or  Adversus  Ixxx.  haereses  (Peta- 
vius,  torn.  i.  f.  1-1108 ;  Migne,  torn.  i.  173-1200,  and  torn.  ii.  10-832).  Epiphanius 
himself  names  it  iravdpiov,  tlr  ovv  Ki^iinLOi'  larpiKhv  koL  ^rjptoSriKTiKoi/,  Panarium, 
sive  Arculam  Medieam  ad  eorum  qui  a  serpentibus  icti  sunt  remedium  (Epist.  ad 
Acacium  et  Paulum,  in  Oehler's  ed.  i.  p.  7). 

^  Compare  the  conyenient  collection  of  the  Latin  writers  Do  hsresibus,  viz.  • 
Philastrius,  Augustine,  the  author  of  Prsedestinatus  (the  first  book),  pseudo-Tertul- 
lian, pseudo- Jerome,  Isidorus  Hispalensis,  and  Gennadius  (De  ecclesiasticis  dogmati- 
bus),  in  the  first  volume  of  Fraxz  Oehler's  Corpus  haereseologicum,  Berolini,  1856. 
This  collection  is  intended  to  embrace  eight  volumes.  Tom.  ii.  and  iii.  contain  the 
anti-heretical  works  of  Epiphanius ;  the  remaining  volumes  are  intended  for  Theod- 
oret,  pseudo-Origen,  John  of  Damascus,  Leontius,  Timotheus,  Irenasus,  and  Nicetae 
Choniatae  Thesaurus  orthodox^  fidei. 

VOL.  n. — 59  • 


930 


THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


and  wliicli,  with  all  their  narrowness  and  passion,  contain 
many  good  thoughts  and  solid  arguments.  He  improperly 
extends  the  conception  of  heresy  over  the  field  of  all  religion ; 
whereas  heresy  is  simply  a  ]3erversion  or  caricature  of  Chris- 
tian truth,  and  lives  only  upon  the  Christian  religion.  He 
describes  and  refutes  no  less  than  eighty  heresies,'  twenty  of 
them  preceding  the  time  of  Christ.*  The  pre-Christian  here- 
sies are :  Barbarism,  from  Adam  to  the  flood ;  Scythism ; 
Hellenism  (idolatry  proper,  with  various  schools  of  philosophy) ; 
Samaritanism  (including  four  different  sects) ;  and  Judaism 
(subdivided  into  seven  parties :  Pharisees,  Sadducees,  Scribes, 
Hemerobaptists,  Osseans,  Kazarenes,  and  Herodians).*  Among 
the  Christian  heresies,  of  which  Simon  Magus,  according  to 
ancient  tradition,  figures  as  patriarch,  the  different  schools  of 
Gnosticism  (which  may  be  easily  reduced  to  about  a  dozen) 
occupy  the  principal  space.     "With   the  sixty-fourth  heresy 

'  Perhaps  with  a  mystic  reference  to  the  eighty  concubines  in  the  Song  of 
Songs,  vi.  8 :  "  Sexaginta  sunt  reginas  et  octoginta  concubinae,  et  adolescentularum 
non  est  numerus.     Una  est  columba  mea,  perfecta  mea."    (Vulgate.) 

*  Pseudo-Tertullian  (in  Libellus  adversus  omnes  hasreses),  Philastrus,  and 
pseudo-Hieronymus  (Indiculus  de  hseresibus)  likewise  include  the  Jewish  sects 
among  the  heresies  ;  while  Irenjeus,  Augustine,  Theodoret,  and  the  unknown  author 
of  the  Semi-Pelagian  work  Praedestinatus  more  correctly  begin  with  the  Christian 
sects.     For  further  particulars,  see  the  comparative  tables  of  Lipsius,  1.  c.  p.  4  ff. 

'  Epiphanius  in  his  shorter  work,  the  Anacephalaeosis,  deviates  somewhat  from 
the  order  in  the  Panarion.     His  twenty  heresies  before  Christ  are  as  follows  : 


Hellenismi 


Samaritwni 


Judaismi 


Order  in  the  Panarion  : 

1.  Barbarismus, 

2.  Scythismus, 

3.  Hellenismus, 

4.  Judaismus, 

5.  Stoici, 

6.  Platonici, 
T.  Pythagorei, 

^   8.  Epicurei, 
9.  Samaritse, 

10.  Esseni, 

11.  Sebuaji, 

12.  Gortheni, 

13.  Dosithei, 
^14.  Saduceei, 
I  15.  Scribae, 
I  16.  Pharistei, 

i<  1*7.  llemerobaptistae, 

18.  Nazaraei, 

19.  Osseni  or  Ossaei, 

20.  Herodiani, 


Order  in  the  Anacephaljeosis  : 

1.  Barbarismus, 

2.  Scythismus, 

3.  Hellenismus, 

4.  Judaismus. 

6.  Samaritismus, 
C   6.  Pythagorei, 

1.  Platonici, 

8.  Stoici, 
[   9.  Epicurei, 
flO.  Gortheni, 

11.  Sebutei, 

12.  Esseni, 

13.  Dosithei, 
fl4.  Scriba3, 

15.  PharisEci, 

16.  Sadducaei, 
Judaismi  ■{  11.  Hemerobaptistae, 

18.  Ossaei, 

19.  Nazaraei, 

20.  Herodiani, 


Hellenismi 


Samaritismi 


I 


§  169.    EPiPHA^-ius.  931 

Epiplianiub  begins  the  "war  upon  the  Origenists,  Arians,  Pho- 
tinians,  Marcellians,  Semi-Arians,  Pneumatomachians,  Anti- 
dikomarianites,  and  other  heretics  of  his  age.  In  the  earlier 
heresies  he  made  large  use,  -without  proper  acknowledgment, 
of  the  well-known  works  of  Justin  Martyr,  Irenaeus,  and  Hip- 
polytus,  and  other  written  sources  and  oral  traditions.  In  the 
latter  sections  he  could  draw  more  on  his  own  observation  and 
experience. 

3.  The  Anacephal-eosis  is  simply  an  abridgment  of  :he 
Panarion,  with  a  somewhat  different  order.  ^ 

This  is  the  proper  place  to  add  a  few  words  upon  similar 
works  of  the  post-Nicene  age. 

About  the  same  time,  or  shortly  after  Epiphanius  (oSO), 
Philasteius  or  Philastktjs,  bishop  of  Brixia  (Brescia),  wrote 
his  Liber  de  h^eresibus  (in  156  chapters).^  He  was  still  more 
liberal  with  the  name  of  heresy,  extending  it  to  one  hundred 
and  fifty-six  systems,  twenty-eight  before  Christ,  and  a  hundred 
and  twenty-eight  after.  He  includes  peculiar  opinions  on  all 
sorts  of  subjects :  Heeresis  de  stellis  coelo  affixis,  hseresis  de 
peccato  Cain,  haeresis  de  Psalterii  ineqnalitate,  hseresis  de  ani- 
malibus  cjuatuor  in  prophetis,  h^resis  de  Septuaginta  interpre- 
tibus,  hseresis  de  AEelchisedech  sacerdote,  haeresis  de  uxoribus 
et  concubinis  Salomonis ! 

He  was  followed  by  St.  Augustixe,  who  in  the  last  years 
of  his  life  wrote  a  brief  compend  on  eighty-eight  heresies,  com- 
mencing with  the  Simonians  and  ending  with  the  Pelagians.' 

'  'AvaKe(pa\a'.'jiiTiSy  Or  Epitome  Panarii  (tore.  ii.  126,  ed.  Patav. ;  torn.  ii.  834- 
886,  ed.  Migne). 

^  Edited  by  /.  A.  Fabnciiis,  Hamburg,  1728 ;  by  GaUandi,  Bibliotheca,  torn. 
vii.  pp.  475-521 ;  and  by  Oehler  in  tom.  i.  of  his  Corpus  hasreseolog.  pp.  5-185. 
The  close  affinity  of  Philastrus  ■with  Epiphanius  is  usually  accounted  for  on  the 
ground  of  the  dependence  of  the  former  on  the  latter.  This  seems  to  hare  been 
the  opinion  of  Augustine,  Epistola  222  ad  Quodvultdeum.  But  Lipsius  (I.  c.  p. 
29  ff.)  derives  both  from  a  common  older  source,  viz.,  the  Trorli  of  Hippolytus 
against  thirty-two  heresies,  and  explains  the  silence  of  Epiphanius  (who  mentions 
Hippolytus  only  once)  by  the  unscrupulousness  of  the  authorship  of  the  age,  which 
had  no  hesitation  in  decking  itself  with  borrowed  plumes. 

^  Liber  de  haeresibus,  addressed  to  Quodvultdeus,  a  deacon  who  had  requested 
him  to  write  such  a  work.  Augustine,  in  his  letter  of  reply  to  Quodvultdeus  (Ep. 
222  in  the  Bened.  edition)  alludes  to  the  work  of  Philastrus,  whom  he  had  seen 


932  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

The  unknown  author  of  the  book  called  Prcedestinatua 
added  two  more  heretical  parties,  the  Nestorians  and  the  Pre- 
destinarians,  to  Augustine's  list;  but  the  Predestinarians  are 
probably  a  mere  invention  of  the  writer  for  the  purjDose  of 
caricaturing  and  exposing  the  heresy  of  an  absolute  predestina- 
tion to  good  and  to  evil.* 

4.  In  addition  to  those  anti-heretical  works,  we  have  from 
Epiphanius  a  biblical  archsBological  treatise  on  the  Measures 
and  "Weights  of  the  Scriptures,^  and  another  on  the  Twelve 
Gems  on  the  breastplate  of  Aaron,  witli  an  allegorical  inter- 
pretation of  their  names.^ 

with  Ambrose  in  Milan,  and  to  that  of  Epiphanius,  and  calls  the  latter  "longe 
Philastrio  doctiorem."  The  work  of  Augustine  is  also  embodied  in  Oehler's  Corpus 
hsereseol.  tom.  i.  pp.  189-225.  The  following  is  a  complete  list  of  the  heresies  of 
Augustine  as  given  by  him  at  the  close  of  the  preface:  1.  Simoniani;  2.  Menan- 
driani;  3.  Saturniniani;  4.  Basilidiani;  5.  Nicolaitas ;  6.  Gnostici;  7.  Carpocratiani; 
8.  Cerinthiani,  vel  Merinthiani;  9.  Nazaraei;  10.  Hebionsei;  11.  Valentiniani;  12. 
Secundiani;  13.  Ptolemsei;  14.  Marcitse;  15.  Colorbasii;  16.  Heracleonitae ;  17. 
Ophitse;  18.  Caiani;  19.  Sethiani;  20.  Archontici;  21.  Cerdoniani;  22.  Marcioni- 
tse ;  23.  Apellitse ;  24.  Severiani ;  25.  Tatiani,  vel  Encratitte ;  26.  Cataphryges ;  2*7. 
Pepuziani,  alias  Quintilliani ;  28.  Artotyritse;  29.  Tessarescaedecatitse ;  30.  Alogi; 
31.  Adamiani;  82.  Elcessei  et  Sampsaei;  33.  Theodotiani;  34.  Melchisedechiani ; 
35.  Bardesanistse ;  36.  Noetiani;  37.  Valesii;  38.  Cathari,  sive  Novatiani;  39. 
Angelici;  40.  Apostolici ;  41.  Sabelliani;  42.  Origeniani;  43.  AUi  Origeniani;  44. 
Pauhani ;  45.  Photiniaui;  46.  Manichaei;  47.  Hieracitas;  48.  Meletiani;  49.  Ariani; 
50.  Vadiani,  sive  Anthropomorphitae ;  51.  Semiariani;  52.  Macedoniani;  53.  Aeria- 
ni;  54.  Aetiani,  qui  et  Eunomiani;  55.  ApollinaristJe ;  56.  Antidicomarianitae ; 
57.  Massaliani,  sive  Eucbitaj;  58.  Metangismonitae;  59.  Seleuciani,  vel  Hermiani; 
60.  Proclianitae;  61.  Patriciani;  62.  AscitaB;  63.  Passalorynchitae ;  64.  Aquarii; 
65.  Coluthiani ;  66.  Floriniani ;  67.  De  mundi  statu  dissentientes ;  68.  Nudis  pedibus 
ambulantes;  69.  Donatistae,  sive  Donatiani;  70.  PriscUlianistae ;  71.  Cum  hominibus 
non  manducantes;  72.  Rhetoriani;  73.  Christi  divinitatem  passibUem  dicentes;  74. 
Triformem  deum  putantes;  75.  Aquam  Deo  coasternam  dicentes;  76.  Imaginem  Dei 
non  esse  animam  dicentes ;  77.  Innumerabiles  mundos  opinantes ;  78.  Animas  con- 
vert! in  daemones  et  in  quKcunque  animalia  existimantes ;  79.  Liberationem  omnium 
apud  inferos  factam  Christi  descensione  credentes ;  80.  Christi  de  Patre  nativitati 
initium  temporis  dantes;  81.  Luciferiani ;  82.  lovinianistffi  ;  83.  Arabici;  84.  Helvi- 
diani;  85.  Paterniani,  sive  Venustiani;  86.  Tertullianistaa;  87.  Abeloitte ;  88.  Pela- 
giani,  qui  et  Caslestiani. 

>  Corpus  haereseol.  i.  229-268.     Comp.  above,  §  159. 

"^  Tlipl  fierpaiv  Kol  (TTadfiwv,  De  ponderibus  et  mensuris,  written  in  392.  (Tom. 
ii.  158,  ed.  Petav. ;  tom.  iii.  237,  ed.  Migne.) 

^  Uepl  Tuiv  SciSeKa  \ibuiv,  De  xii.  gemmis  in  veste  Aaronis.  (Tom.  ii.  233,  ed. 
Pet. ;  iii.  293,  ed.  Migne.) 


V 


'  ,- — — — — :       _  1'*'  1       y/v  /  ^->     y         <  ^^T»'    .Xr^      ^ 


l7    , 


V(^,,,. 


9 


■u 


'^''i/i^  fvTlgt^ 


O'L 


^T^^^  wJit    ^TCA-o-rv  //a^'a^t^^w  ^  ^  -'wffV  »y 


fS-  ^t;  ifr^v   ji^-sT^^'  Uf^r   yW^^'^-.u  .  fti^-lc^  Vl(  vii«'^vv^fy.  ,   ^vvri 


^<a^^^,(t^ 


.-■^««^ 


y^/^   ,i;ry»4^  a^/C  qyi^l^A^U 


ne-^,  iJCfc^Z 


c^  /^  /^  /*%Mt  >i^  «6<c««r  <?t«:e^ 


&<'^'t^i    *U-f  a^t^  uf&if-  -^»-^/iet*«*/  -w^T  a,i^s^   A^;4f    ^i^«  c^^^^t*^  ^^S-/^^  -ft^/fe*^ 
A-..^  -«5<,  /t*...,^.^  f^  /f^^'^'^   ^^^-^^    ^^  ,y<^t^'^  .  ^^^^^^  '^%,„  ^^^■'-^■ 


jS^Wtt.     y^?^"^    ■'  ^^'^    '»■"-     '    "^   »■■'"     m^~»^iSc^ym^  -A.eMA^,  %c^,,^U^  <^-rti^  jre^ua 


I 


§   170.      JOHN    CHRYSOSTOM.  937 

the  Trinitarian  and  the  Christological  controversies.  He  was 
not  therefore  involved  in  any  doctrinal  controversy  except  the 
Origenistic ;  and  in  that  he  had  a  very  innocent  part,  as  his 
imspeculative  turn  of  mind  kept  him  from  all  share  in  .the 
Origenistic  errors.  Had  he  lived  a  few  decades  later,  he  would 
perhaps  have  fallen  under  suspicion  of  Nestorianism ;  for  he 
belonged  to  the  same  Antiochian  school  with  his  teacher  Dio- 
dorus  of  Tarsus,  his  fellow-student  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  and 
his  successor  Nestorius,  From  this  school,  whose  doctrinal 
development  was  not  then  complete,  he  derived  a  taste  for  the 
simple,  sober,  grammatico-historical  interpretation,  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  arbitrary  allegorizing  of  the  Alexaudrians,  while  he 
remained  entirely  free  from  the  rationalizing  tendency  which 
that  school  soon  afterwards  discovered.  He  is  thus  the  sound- 
est and  worthiest  representative  of  the  Antiochian  theology. 
In  anthropology  he  is  a  decided  synergist ;  and  his  pupil  Cassian, 
the  founder  of  Semi-Pelagianism,  gives  him  for  an  authority.* 
But  his  synergism  is  that  of  the  whole  Greek  church ;  it  had 
no  direct  conflict  with  Augustinianism,  for  Chrysostom  died 
several  years  before  the  opening  of  the  Pelagian  controversy. 
He  opposed  the  Arians  and  Novatians,  and  faithfully  and  con- 
stantly adhered  to  the  church  doctrine,  so  far  as  it  was  devel- 
oped ;  but  he  avoided  narrow  dogmatism  and  angry  controver- 
sy, and  laid  greater  stress  on  practical  piety  than  on  unfruitful 
orthodoxy.* 

Yaluable  as  the  contributions  of  Chrysostom  to  didactic 
theology  may  be,  his  chief  importance  and  merit  lie  not  in  this 
department,  but  in  homiletical  exegesis,  pulpit  eloquence,  and 
pastoral  care.     Here   he  is  unsurpassed   among   the  ancient 

'  Julian  of  Eclanum  bad  already  appealed  several  times  to  Chrysostom  against 
Augustine,  as  Augustine  notes  Contra  Jul.,  and  in  the  Opus  imperfectum. 

*  NiEDNER  (Geschichte  der  christl.  Kirche,  1846,  p.  323,  and  in  his  posthumous 
Lehrbuch,  1866,  p.  303)  briefly  characterizes  him  thus:  "In  him  we  find  a  most 
complete  mutual  interpenetration  of  theoretical  and  practical  theology,  as  well  as  of 
the  dogmatical  and  ethical  elements,  exhibited  mainly  in  the  fusion  of  the  exegetical 
and  homiletical.  Hence  his  exegesis  was  guarded  against  barren  philology  and 
dogma;  and  his  pulpit  discourse  was  free  from  doctrinal  abstraction  and  empty 
rhetoric.  The  introduction  of  the  knowledge  of  Christianity  from  the  sources  into 
the  practical  life  of  the  people  left  him  little  time  for  the  development  of  special 
doa;mas." 


938  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

fathers,  wlietlier  Greek  or  Latin.  By  talent  and  culture  he 
was  peculiarly  fitted  to  labor  in  a  great  metropolis.  At  that 
time  a  bishop,  as  he  himself  says,  enjoyed  greater  honor  at 
court,  in  the  society  of  ladies,  in  the  houses  of  the  nobles,  than 
the  first  dignitaries  of  the  empire.'  Hence  the  great  danger 
of  hierarchical  pride  and  worldly  conformity,  to  which  so  many 
of  the  prelates  succumbed.  This  danger  Chrysostom  happily 
avoided.  He  continued  his  plain  monastic  mode  of  life  in  the 
midst  of  the  splendor  of  the  imperial  residence,  and  applied  all 
his  superfluous  income  to  the  support  of  the  sick  and  the 
stranger.  Poor  for  himself,  he  was  rich  for  the  poor.  He 
preached  an  earnest  Christianity  fruitful  in  good  works,  he 
insisted  on  strict  discipline,  and  boldly  attacked  the  vices  of 
the  age  and  the  hollow,  worldly,  hypocritical  religion  of  the 
court.  He,  no  doubt,  transcended  at  times  the  bounds 
of  moderation  and  prudence,  as  when  he  denounced  the  em- 
press Eudoxia  as  a  new  Herodias  thirsting  after  the  blood  of 
John ;  but  he  erred  "  on  virtue's  side,"  and  his  example  of 
fearless  devotion  to  duty  has  at  all  times  exerted  a  most 
salutary  influence  upon  clergymen  in  high  and  influential 
stations.  Keander  not  inaptly  compares  his  work  in  the 
Greek  church  with  that  of  Spener,  the  practical  reformer  in 
the  Lutheran  church  of  the  seventeenth  century,  and  calls  him 
a  martjT  of  Christian  charity,  who  fell  a  victim  in  the  conflict 
with  the  worldly  spirit  of  his  age.''  . 

In  the  pulpit  Cbrysostom  was  a  monarch  of  unlimited 
power  over  his  hearers.  His  sermons  were  frequently  inter- 
rupted by  noisy  theatrical  demonstrations  of  applause,  Avhich 
he  indignantly  rebuked  as  unworthy  of  the  house  of  God.'^ 
He  had  trained  his  natural  gift  of  eloquence,  which  was  of  the 
first  order,  in  the  school  of  Demosthenes  and  Libanius,  and 
ennobled  and  sanctified  it  in  the  higher  school  of  the  Holy 

'  The  rSn-apxoi  aud  virapxot,  the  prfefeeti  prffitorio.     Homil.  iii.  in  Acta  Apost. 

'  In  his  monograph  on  Chrysostom,  toI.  i.  p.  5. 

'  This  Grceli  custom  of/ applauding  the  preacher  by  clapping  the  hands  and 
stamping  the  feet  (called  KpoTos,  from  Kpovu)  was  a  sign  of  the  secularization  of  the 
church  after  its  union  with  the  state.  It  is  characteristic  of  his  age  that  a  powerful 
sermon  of  Chrysostom  against  this  abuse  was  most  enthusiastically  applauded  by 
his  hearers ! 


^A<LC  /i^«r«/^»^«?    A^  «4^«.'««-M    -7^ .  5"^ 


i^^ 


y 


^//Z 


^;^^..^C^C^t^<.'iC^-^-i.^     ^e-*^-*"  i«t-^-e- «^»'<><'  . 


^ayi-^w^. 


§   170.      JOHN   CHETSOSTOM.  939 

Spirit/  He  was  in  the  habit  of  makiDg  careful  preparation 
for  his  sermons  by  the  study  of  the  Scriptures,  prayer,  and 
meditation ;  but  he  knew  how  to  turn  to  good  account  unex- 
pected occurrences,  and  some  of  his  noblest  efforts  were  extem- 
poraneous effusions  under  the  inspiration  of  the  occasion.  His 
ideas  are  taken  from  Christian  experience  and  especially  from 
the  inexhaustible  stores  of  the  Bible,  which  he  made  his  daily 
bread,  and  which  he  earaestly  recommended  even  to  the  laity. 
He  took  up  whole  books  and  explained  them  in  order,  instead 
of  confining  himself  to  particular  texts,  as  was  the  custom 
after  the  introduction  of  the  pericopes.  His  language  is  noble, 
solemn,  vigorous,  fiery,  and  often  overpowering.  Yet  he  was 
by  no  means  wholly  free  from  the  untruthful  exaggerations 
and  artificial  antitheses,  which  were  regarded  at  that  time  as 
the  greatest  ornament  and  highest  triumph  of  eloquence,  but 
which  appear  to  a  healthy  and  cultivated  taste  as  defects  and 
degeneracies.  The  most  eminent  French  preachers,  Bossuet, 
Massillon,  and  Bourdaloue,  have  taken  Chrysostom  for  their 
model.^  ■^^^ .-'-- .-^    .    -  ■-'?-<:?    ^.   •-.       ■     (^'^'fl  !- 

By  far  the  most  numerous  and  most  valuable  writings  of 
this  father  are  the  Homilies,  over  six  hundred  in  number,  which 
he  delivered  while  presbyter  at  Antioch  and  while  bishop  at 
3  Constantinople.*  They  embody  his  exegesis ;  and  of  this  they 
are  a  rich  storehouse,  from  which  the  later  Greek  commenta- 
tors, Theodoret,  Tlieophylact,  and  (Ecumenius,  have  drawn, 
sometimes  content  to  epitomize  his  expositions.  Commentaries, 
properly  so  called,  he  wrote  only  on  the  first  eight  chapters  of 
Isaiah  and  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians.  But  nearly  all  his 
sermons  on  Scrij^ture  texts  are  more  or  less  expository.  He 
has  left  us  homilies  on  Genesis,  the  Psalms,  the  Gospel  of 
Matthew,  the  Gospel  of  John,  the  Acts,  and  all  the  Epistles 

'  Karl  Hase  (Kirchengeschiclite,  §  104,  seventh  edition)  truly  says  of  Chrysos- 
tom that  "  he  complemented  the  sober  clearness  of  the  Antiochian  exegesis  and  the 
rhetorical  arts  of  Libanius  with  the  depth  of  his  ■warm  Christian  heart,  and  that  he 
carried  out  in  his  own  life,  as  far  as  mortal  man  can  do  it,  the  ideal  of  the  priest- 
■^  /      "^--^Jbood  which,  in  youthful  enthusiasm,  he  once  described." 
*/     /^^ ^  "'  They  are  contained  in  vols,  ii.-xii.  of  the  Benedictine  edition. 


940  THERD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

of  Paul,  including  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  His  homilies 
on  the  Pauline  Epistles  are  especially  esteemed.' 

Besides  these  expository  sermons  on  whole  books  of  the 
Scriptures,  Chrysostom  delivered  homilies  on  separate  sections 
or  verses  of  Scripture,  festal  discourses,  orations  in  commemo- 
ration of  apostles  and  martyrs,  and  discourses  on  special  occa- 
sions. Among  the  last  are  eight  homilies  Against  the  Jews 
(against  Judaizing  tendencies  in  the  church  at  Antioch), 
twelve  homilies  Against  the  Anomoeans  (Arians),  and  especially 
the  celebrated  twenty  and  one  homilies  On  the  Statues,  which 
called  forth  his  highest  oratorical  powers!'^  He  delivered  the 
homilies  on  the  Statues  at  Antioch  in  387  during  a  season  of 
extraordinary  public  excitement,  when  the  people,  oppressed 
by  excessive  taxation,  rose  in  rebellion,  tore  down  the  statues 
of  the  emperor  Theodosius  I.,  the  deceased  empress  Flacilla, 
and  the  princes  Arcadius  and  Honorius,  dragged  them  through 
the  streets,  and  so  provoked  the  wrath  of  the  emperor  that  he 
threatened  to  destroy  the  city — a  calamity  which  was  avoided 
by  the  intercession  of  bishop  Flavian. 

The  other  works  of  Clirysostom  are  his  youthful  treatise  on 
the  Priesthood  already  alluded  to ;  a  number  of  doctrinal  and 
moral  essays  in  defence  of  the  Christian  faith,  and  in  commend- 
ation of  celibacy  and  the  nobler  forms  of  monastic  life; '  and 
two  hundred  and  forty-two  letters,  nearly  all  written  during 
his  exile  between  403  and  407.  The  most  important  of  the 
letters  are  two  addressed  to  the  Roman  bishop  Innocent  I., 

*  A  beautiful  edition  of  the  Homilies  on  the  Pauline  Epistles  in  Greek  (but 
without  the  Latin  version)  hus  been  recently  published  in  connection  with  the  Ox- 
ford Library  of  the  Fathers  under  the  title :  S.  Joannis  Chrysostomi  interpretatio 
omnium  Epistolarum  Paulinarum  per  homilias  facta,  Oxon.  1849-'52,  4  vols.  The 
English  translation  has  already  been  noticed. 

*  The  Homihffi  xii  contra  Anomoeans  de  incomprehensibili  Dei  natura,  and  the 
Orationes  viii  adversus  Judaeos  are  in  the  first,  the  Homiliai  xxi  ad  populum  Anti- 
ochenum,  de  statuis,  and  the  six  Orationes  de  fate  et  provideutia,  in  the  second  vol- 
ume of  the  Bened.  edition.  The  Homilies  on  the  Statues  are  translated  into  English 
in  the  Oxford  Library  of  the  Fathers,  1842,  1  volume. 

^  Ad  Theodorum  lapsum ;  Adversus  oppugnatores  vitas  raonasticffi ;  Comparatio 
regis  et  monachi ;  De  compunctione  cordis ;  De  virginitate ;  Ad  viduam  juniorem, 
etc., — all  in  the  first  volume  of  the  Bened.  edition  together  with  the  vi  Libri  de 
Sacerdotio ;  also  in  Lomler's  selection  of  Chrys.  Opera  praestantissima. 


§  170.      JOHN  CHEY80ST0M.  941 

with  liis  reply,  and  seventeen  long  letters  to  liis  friend  Olym- 
pias,  a  pious  widow  and  deaconess.  They  all  breathe  a  noble 
Christian  spirit,  not  desiring  to  be  recalled  from  exile,  con- 
vinced that  there  is  but  one  misfortune, — departure  from  the 
path  of  piety  and  virtue,  and  filled  with  cordial  friendship, 
faithful  care  for  all  the  interests  of  the  church,  and  a  calm  and 
cheerful  looking  forward  to  the  glories  of  heaven.' 

The  so-called  Liturgy  of  Chrysostom,  which  is  still  in  use         / 
in  the  Greek  and  Kussian  churches,  has  been  already  noticed     / 
in  the  proper  place.*  .,X 

Among  the  pupils  and  admirers  of  Chrysostom  we  mention 
as  deserving  of  special  notice  two  abbots  of  the  first  half  of 
the  fifth  century :  the  elder  Kilus  of  Sinai,  who  retired  with 
his  son  from  one  of  the  highest  civil  stations  of  the  empire  to 
the  contemplative  soHtude  of  Mount  Sinai,  while  his  wife  and 
daughter  entered  a  convent  of  Egypt  f  and  Isidore  or  Pelusium, 
or  Pelusiota,  a  native  of  Alexandria,  who  presided  over  a 
convent  not  far  from  the  mouth  of  the  Nile,  and  sympathized 
with  Cyril  against  Nestorius,  but  warned  him  against  his  vio- 
lent passions."  They  are  among  the  worthiest  representatives 
of  ancient  monasticism,  and,  in  a  large  number  of  letters  and 
exegetical  and  ascetic  treatises,  they  discuss,  with  learning, 
piety,  judgment,  and  moderation,  nearly  all  the  theological 
and  practical  questions  of  their  age. 

'  The  Epistles  are  in  torn.  iii.  Tlie  Epistolse  ad  Olympiadem,  and  ad  Innocen- 
tium  are  also  included  in  Lomler's  selection  (pp.  165-252).  On  Olympias,  compare 
above,  §  52,  and  especially  Tillemont,  torn.  xi.  pp.  416^40. 

*  See  above,  §  99. 

'  Comp.  S.  P.  N.  NiLi  abbatis  opera  omnia,  variorimi  curis,  nempe  Leonis  Alia- 
tii,  Petri  Possini,  etc.,  edita,  nunc  primum  in  unum  collecta  et  ordinata,  accurante 
/.  P.  Miffne,  Par.  1860,  1  volume.     (PatroL  Gr.  tom.  79.) 

*  Comp.  S.  IsiDORi  Pelusiota  Epistolarum  libri  v,  ed.  Possinus  (Jesuit),  repub- 
lished by  Migne,  Par.  1860.  (Patrol.  Gr.  tom.  'ZS,  including  the  dissertation  of  H. 
Ag.  Niemeyer:  De  Isid.  Pel.  vita,  scriptis  et  doctrina,  Hal.  1825.)  It  is  not  certain 
that  Isidore  was  a  pupil  of  Chrysostom,  but  he  frequently  mentions  him  with  respect, 
and  was  evidently  well  acquainted  with  his  writings.  See  the  dissertation  of  Nie- 
meyer, in  Migne's  ed.  p.  15  sq. 


94:3  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


§  171.     Cyril  of  Alexandria. 

I.  S.  OxRiLLrs,  Ales,  archiepisc. :  Opera  omnia,  Gr.  et  Lat.,  cura  et  studio 

Joan.  Auberti.  Lutetite,  1638,  6  vols,  in  7  fol.  The  same  edition 
■witli  considerable  additions  by  J.  P.  Migne,  Petit-Montrouge,  1859,  in 
10  vols.  (Patrol.  Gr.  torn.  Ixviii.-lxxvii.).  Comp,  Angelo  MaVs  Nova 
Bibliotbeca  Patrum,  torn.  11.  pp.  1-498  (Kom.  1844),  and  torn.  iii. 
(Eom.  1845),  wbere  several  writings  of  Cyril  are  printed  for  the  first 
time,  viz. :  De  incarnatione  Domini ;  Exj^lanatio  in  Lucam ;  Homilige ; 
Excerpta ;  Fragments  of  Commentaries  on  the  Psalms,  and  the  Pauline 
and  Catholic  Epistles.  (These  additional  works  are  incorporated  in 
Migne's  edition.)  Cyeilli  Oommentarii  in  LucEe  Evangelium  quae 
supersunt,  Syriace,  e  manuscriptis  apud  museum  Britannicum  edidit 
Hoi).  Payne  Smith,  Oxonii,  1858.  The  same  also  in  an  English  version 
with  valuable  notes  by  P.  P.  Smith,  Oxford,  1859,  in  2  vols? . 

II.  Scattered  notices  of  Cyril  in  Soceates,  Maeius  Meeoatob,  and  the  Acts 

of  the  ecumenical  councils  of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon.  Tillemont  : 
Tom.  xiv.  267-676,  and  notes,  pp.  747-795.  Celliee  :  Tom.  xiii.  241 
sqq.  Acta  Sanctoeum:  Jan.  28,  torn.  ii.  A.  Butlee:  Jan.  28. 
EABEicirs :  Biblioth.  Gr.  ed.  Earless,  vol.  ix.  p.  446  sqq.  (The  Vita 
of  the  Bollandists  and  the  Noticia  literaria  of  Fabricius  are  also  re^ 
printed  in  Migne's  edition  of  Cyril,  torn.  1.  pp.  1-90.)  Scheockh 
Theil  sviii.  313-354.  Comp.  also  the  Prefaces  of  Angelo  Mai  to  torn, 
ii.  of  the  Nova  Bibl.  Patrum,  and  of  E.  P.  Smith  to  his  translation  of 
Cyril's  Commentary  on  Luke. 

While  tlie  lives  and  labors  of  most  of  the  fathers  of  the 
church  continually  inspire  our  admiration  arid  devotion,  Cyeil 
OF  Alexandria  makes  an  extremely  unpleasant,  or  at  least  an 
extremely  equivocal,  impression.  He  exhibits  to  us  a  man 
making  theology  and  orthodoxy  the  instruments  of  his 
passions, 

Cyrillus  became  patriarch  of  Alexandria  about  the  year 
412.  He  trod  in  the  footsteps  of  his  predecessor  and  uncle, 
the  notorious  Theophilus,  who  had  deposed  the  noble  Chrysos- 
tom  and  procured  his  banishment ;  in  fact,  he  exceeded  Theo- 
philus in  arrogance  and  violence.  He  had  hardly  entered 
upon  his  office,  when  he  closed  all  the  churches  of  the  l^ova- 
tians  in  Alexandria,  and  seized  their  ecclesiastical  property. 
In  the  year  415  he  fell  upon  the  synagogues  of  the  very  nume- 
rous Jews  with  armed  force,  because,  under  provocation  of  his 


■^.  /^>^/  ,i  ,yCi^  j^  /?ii^  -/:  /^<'5_  /7:?, 


A. 


\^ 


§   171.      CYEIL   OF   ALEXANDRIA.  943 

bitter  injustice,  they  had  been  guilty  of  a  trifling  tumult ;  he 
put  some  to  death,  and  drove  out  the  rest,  and  exposed  their 
property  to  the  excited  multitude. 

These  invasions  of  the  province  of  the  secular  power 
brought  him  into  quarrel  and  continual  contest  with  Orestes, 
the  imperial  governor  of  Alexandria.  He  summoned  five 
hundred  monks  from  the  Nitrian  mountains  for  his  guard, 
who  publicly  insulted  the  governor.  One  of  them,  by  the 
name  of  Ammon,  wounded  him  with  a  stone,  and  was  there- 
upon killed  by  Orestes.  But  Cyril  caused  the  monk  to  be 
buried  in  state  in  a  church  as  a  holy  martyr  to  religion,  and 
surnamed  him  Thaumasios,  the  Admirable ;  yet  he  found  him- 
self compelled  by  the  universal  disgust  of  cultivated  people  to 
let  this  act  be  gradually  forgotten. 

Cyiil  is  also  frequently  charged  with  the  instigation  of  the 
murder  of  the  renowned  Hypatia.  a  friend  of  Orestes.  But  in 
this  cruel  tragedy  he  probably  had  only  the  indirect  part  of 
exciting  the  passions  of  the  Christian  populace  W'hich  led  to  it, 
and  of  giving  them  the  sanction  of  his  high  office.^ 

From  his  uncle  he  had  learned  a  strong  aversion  to  Chrys- 
ostom,  and  at  the  notorious  Synodus  ad  Quercum  near  Chalce- 
don,  A.  D.  403,  he  voted  for  his  deposition.  He  therefore  obsti- 
nately resisted  the  patriarchs  of  Constantinople  and  Antioch, 
when,  shortly  after  the  death  of  Chrysostom,  they  felt  con- 
strained to  repeal  his  unjust  condemnation ;   and  he  was  not 

*  Comp.  above,  §  6,  p.  67,  and  Tillemont,  torn.  xiv.  274-76.  The  learned,  but 
superstitious  and  credulous  Roman  Catholic  hagiographer,  Alban  Butler  (Lives  of 
the  Saints,  sub  Jan.  28),  considers  Cyril  innocent,  and  appeals  to  the  silence  of 
Orestes  and  Socrates.  But  Socrates,  H.  E.  1.  vii.  c.  15,  expressly  says  of  this  revolt- 
ing murder:  Tovto  oh  fitKphv  iJ.wiJ.ou  KvpiWcc,  Kal  ry  Tuv'AAe^avSpeon'  iKKXyjcria.  elpya- 
(TOTo,  and  adds  that  nothing  can  be  so  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  Christianity  as  the 
permission  of  murders  and  similar  acts  of  violence.  Walch,  Schrockh,  Gibbon,  and 
Milman  incUne  to  hold  Cyril  responsible  for  the  murder  of  Hypatia,  which  was  per- 
petrated under  the  direction  of  a  reader  of  his  church,  by  the  name  of  Peter.  But 
the  evidence  is  not  suflBcient.  J.  C.  Robertson  (History  of  the  Christian  Church,  i. 
p.  401)  more  cautiously  says:  "That  Cyril  had  any  share  in  this  atrocity  appears  to 
be  an  unsupported  calumny ;  but  the  perpetrators  were  mostly  officers  of  his  church, 
and  had  unquestionably  drawn  encouragement  from  his  earlier  proceedings  ;  and  his 
character  deservedly  suffered  in  consequence."  Similarly  W.  Bright  (A  History  of 
the  Church  from  313  to  451,  p.  275):  "Had  there  been  no  onslaught  on  the  syna- 
gogues, there  would  doubtless  have  been  no  murder  of  Hypatia." 


944  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

even  ashamed  to  compare  that  holy  man  to  the  traitor  Judas. 
Yet  he  afterwards  yielded,  at  least  in  appearance,  to  the 
urgent  remonstrances  of  Isidore  of  Pelusium  and  others,  and 
admitted  the  name  of  Chrysostom  into  the  diptychs*  of  his 
church  (419),  and  so  brought  the  Roman  see  again  into  com- 
munication with  Alexandria. 

From  the  year  428  to  his  death  in  444  his  life  was  inter- 
woven with  the  Christological  controversies.  He  was  the  most 
zealous  and  the  most  influential  champion  of  the  anti-Nesto- 
rian  orthodoxy  at  the  third  ecumenical  council,  and  scrupled 
at  no  measures  to  annihilate  his  antagonist.  Besides  the 
weapons  of  theological  learning  and  acumen,  he  allowed  him- 
self also  the  use  of  wilful  misrepresentation,  artifice,  violence, 
instigation  of  people  and  monks  at  Constantinople,  and  re- 
peated bribery  of  imperial  officers,  even  of  the  emperor's  sister 
Pulcheria,  By  his  bribes  he  loaded  the  church  property  at 
Alexandria  with  debt,  though  he  left  considerable  wealth  even 
to  his  kindred,  and  adjured  his  successor,  the  worthless  Dios- 
curus,  with  the  most  solemn  religious  ceremonies,  not  to  dis- 
turb his  heirs.'* 

His  subsequent  exertions  for  the  restoration  of  peace  can- 
not wipe  these  stains  from  his  character ;  for  he  was  forced  to 
those  exertions  by  the  power  of  the  opposition.  His  successor 
Dioscurus,  however  (after  444),  made  him  somewhat  res^^ecta- 
ble  by  inheriting  all  his  passions  without  his  theological  abili- 
ty, and  by  setting  them  in  motion  for  the  destruction  of  the 
peace. 

Cyril  furnishes  a  striking  proof  that  orthodoxy  and  piety 
are  two  quite  different  things,  and  that  zeal  for  pure  doctrine 
may  coexist  with  an  unchristian  spirit.     In  personal  character 

'  That  is,  the  Siirrvxa  veKpSiv^  or  two-leaved  tablets,  with  the  list  of  names  of 
distinguished  martyrs  and  bishops,  and  other  persons  of  merit,  of  whom  mention 
was  to  be  made  in  the  prayers  of  the  church.  The  Greek  church  has  retained  the 
use  of  diptychs  to  this  day. 

■^  Dioscurus,  however,  did  not  keep  his  word,  but  extorted  from  the  heirs  of 
Cyril  immense  sums  of  money,  and  reduced  them  to  extreme  want.  So  one  of 
Cyril's  relatives  complained  to  the  council  at  Chalcedon  against  Dioscurus  (Acta 
Cone.  Chalc.  Act.  iii.  in  Hardoum,  torn.  ii.  406).  A  verification  of  the  proverb :  111 
gotten,  ill  gone. 


§   171.      CYKIL   OF    ALEXAKDEIA.  945 

he  unquestionably  stands  far  below  his  unfortunate  antagonist. 
The  judgment  of  the  Catholic  historians  is  bound  by  the 
authority  of  their  church,  which,  in  strange  blindness,  has 
canonized  him.'  Yet  Tillemont  feels  himself  compelled  to 
admit  that  Cyril  did  much  that  is  unworthy  of  a  saint.^  The 
estimate  of  Protestant  historians  has  been  the  more  severe. 
The  moderate  and  honest  Chr.  W.  Franz  Walch  can  hardly 
give  him  credit  for  anything  good  ;  ^  and  the  English  historian, 
H.  H.  Milman,  says  he  would  rather  appear  before  the  judg- 
ment-seat of  Christ,  loaded  with  all  the  heresies  of  Nestorius, 
than  with  the  barbarities  of  Cyril.* 

But  the  faults  of  his  personal  character  should  not  blind  us 
to  the  merits  of  Cyril  as  a  theologian.  He  was  a  man  of 
vigorous  and  acute  mind  and  extensive  learning,  and  is  clearly 
to  be  reckoned  among  the  most  important  dogmatic  and 
polemic  divines  of  the  Greek  church."  Of  his  contemporaries 
Theodoret  alone  was  his  superior.     He  was  the  last  considera- 

'  Even  the  monophysite  Copts  and  Abyssinians  celebrate  his  memory  under  the 
abbreviated  name  of  Kerlos,  and  the  title  of  Doctor  of  the  World. 

^  Memoires,  xiv.  541 :  "  S.  Cyrille  est  Saint :  mais  on  ne  pent  pas  dire  que  toutes 
ses  actions  soient  saintes." 

^  Comp.  the  description  at  the  close  of  the  fifth  volume  of  his  tedious  but  thor- 
ough Ketzerhistorie,  where,  after  recounting  the  faults  of  Cyril,  he  exclaims,  p. 
932 :  "  Can  a  man  read  such  a  character  without  a  shudder  ?  And  yet  nothing  is 
fabricated  here,  nothing  overdrawn ;  nothing  is  done  but  to  collect  what  is  scat- 
tered in  history.  And  what  is  worst :  I  find  nothing  at  all  that  can  be  said  in  his 
praise."  Schrockh  (1.  c.  p.  352),  in  his  prolix  and  loquacious  way,  gives  an  equally 
unfavorable  opinion,  and  the  more  extols  his  antagonist  Theodoret  (p.  355  sqq.), 
who  was  a  much  more  learned  aud  pious  man,  but  in  his  life-time  was  persecuted, 
and  after  liis  death  condemned  as  a  heretic,  while  Cyril  was  pronounced  a  saint. 

*  History  of  Lathi  Christianity,  vol.  i.  p.  210 :  "  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  to  those 
who  esteem  the  stern  and  imcompromising  assertion  of  certain  Christian  tenets  the 
one  paramount  Christian  virtue,  may  be  the  hero,  even  the  saint :  but  while  ambi- 
tion, intrigue,  arrogance,  rapacity,  and  violence,  are  proscribed  as  unchristian  means 
— barbarity,  persecution,  bloodshed,  as  unholy  and  unevangelic  wickednesses — 
posterity  will  condemn  the  orthodox  Cyril  as  one  of  the  worst  heretics  against  the 
spirit  of  the  Gospel.  Who  would  not  meet  the  judgment  of  the  divine  Redeemer 
loaded  with  the  errors  of  Nestorius  rather  than  the  barbarities  of  Cyril  ?  " 

*  Baur  (Vorlesungen  iiber  Dogmengeschichte,  i.  ii.  p.  4'7)  says  of  Cyril :  "  The 
current  estimate  of  him  is  not  altogether  just.  As  a  theologian  he  must  be  placed 
higher  than  he  usually  is.  He  remained  true  to  the  spirit  of  the  Alexandrian  theol- 
ogy, particularly  in  his  predilection  for  the  allegorical  and  the  mystical,  and  he  had 
a  doctrine  consistent  with  itself." 

VOL.  II. — 60 


946  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

ble  representative  of  the  Alexandrian  theology  and  the  Alex- 
andrian church,  which,  however,  was  already  beginning  to 
degenerate  and  stiffen;  and  thus  he  offsets  Theodoret,  who 
is  the  most  learned  representative  of  the  Antiochiau  school. 
He  aimed  to  be  the  same  to  the  doctrine  of  the  incarnation 
and  the  person  of  Christ,  that  his  purer  and  greater  predecessor 
in  the  see  of  Alexandria  had  been  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity 
a  century  before.  But  he  overstrained  the  supranaturalism 
and  mysticism  of  the  Alexandrian  theology,  and  in  his  zeal  for 
the  reality  of  the  incarnation  and  the  unity  of  the  person  of 
Christ,  he  went  to  the  brink  of  the  monophysite  error ;  even 
sustaining  himself  by  the  words  of  Athanasius,  though  not  by 
his  spirit,  because  the  Nicene  age  had  not  yet  fixed  beyond  all 
interchange   the   theological   distinction    between   ova-la   and 

UTTOCTTacri?.^ 

And  connected  with  this  is  his  enthusiastic  zeal  for  the 
honor  of  Mary  as  the  virgin-mother  of  God.  In  a  pathetic  and 
turgid  eulogy  on  Mary,  which  he  delivered  at  Ephesus  during 
the  third  ecumenical  council,  he  piles  upon  her  predicates  which 
exceed  all  biblical  limits,  and  border  upon  idolatry.^  "  Blessed 
be  thou,"  says  he,  "  O  mother  of  God !  Thou  rich  treasm*e  of 
the  world,  inextinguishable  lamp,  crown  of  virginity,  sceptre  of 
true  doctrine,  imperishable  temple,  habitation  of  Him  whom  no 
space  can  contain,  mother  and  virgin,  through  whom  He  is,  who 
comes  in  the  name  of  the  Lord.  Blessed  be  thou,  O  Mary,  who 
didst  hold  in  thy  womb  the  Infinite  One ;  thou  through  whom 
the  blessed  Trinity  is  glorified  and  worshipped,  through  whom 
the  precious  cross  is  adored  throughout  the  world,  through 
whom  heaven  rejoices  and  angels  and  archangels  are  glad, 
through  wliom  the  devil  is  disarmed  and  banished,  through  whom 
the  fallen  creature  is  restored  to  heaven,  through  whom  every 


'  This  is  not  considered  by  R.  P.  Smith,  when,  in  the  Preface  to  his  English 
translation  of  Cyril's  Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  Luke  from  the  Syriac  (p.  v.),  he 
says,  that  Cyril  never  transcended  Athanasius'  doctrine  of  ;uia  (piai^  tov  ©eoD  Xoyov 
<Teaapicco/j.fvT],  and  that  both  are  irreconcilable  with  the  dogma  of  Chalcedon,  which 
rests  upon  the  Antiochian  theology.     Comp.  §§  137-140,  above. 

*  Encomium  in  sanctam  Mariam  Deiparam,  in  torn.  v.  Pars  ii.  p.  380  (in  Migne's 
ed.  tom.  X.  1029  sqq.). 


§  171.      CTKIL   OF   ALEXANDRIA.  947 

believing  soul  is  saved." '  These  and  other  extravagant 
praises  are  interspersed  with  polemic  thrusts  against  Kestorius. 
Tet  Cyril  did  not,  like  Augustine,  exempt  the  Yirgin  from 
sin  or  infirmity,  but,  like  Basil,  he  ascribed  to  her  a  serious 
doubt  at  the  cnicifixion  concerning  the  true  divinity  of  Chrisfc, 
and  a  shrinking  from  the  cross,  similar  to  that  of  Peter,  when 
he  was  scandalized  at  the  bare  mention  of  it,  and  exclaimed : 
"Be  it  far  from  thee,  Lord !  "  (Matt.  xvi.  22.)  In  commenting 
on  John  xix.  25,  Cyril  says :  " The  female  sex  somehow  is  e.er 
fond  of  tears,^  and  given  to  much  lamentation,  ...  It 
was  the  pm*pose  of  the  holy  evangehst  to  teach,  that  probably 
even  the  mother  of  the  Lord  Himself  took  offence  ^  at  the  un- 
expected passion ;  and  the  death  upon  the  cross,  being  so  very 
bitter,  was  near  unsettling  her  from  her  fitting  mind.  .  .  . 
Doubt  not  that  she  admitted  *  some  such  thoughts  as  these  :  I 
bore  Him  who  is  laughed  at  on  the  wood ;  but  when  He  said 
He  was  the  true  Son  of  the  Omnipotent  God,  perhaps  somehow 
He  was  mistaken."  He  said,  '  I  am  the  Life ; '  how  then  has 
He  been  crucified  ?  how  has  He  been  strangled  by  the  cords 
of  BUs  murderers  ?  how  did  He  not  prevail  over  the  plot  of 
His  persecutors?  why  does  He  not  descend  from  the  cross, 
since  He  bade  Lazarus  to  return  to  life,  and  filled  all  Jndsea 
with  amazement  at  His  miracles?  And  it  is  very  natural 
that  woman,®  not  knowing  the  mystery,  should  slide  into  some 
such  trains  of  thought.  For  we  should  understand,  that  the 
gravity  of  the  circumstances  of  the  Passion  was  enough  to 
overturn  even  a  self-possessed  mind;  it  is  no  wonder  then 
if  woman  ^  slipped  into  this  reasoning."  Cyril  thus  under- 
stands the  prophecy  of  Simeon  (Luke  ii.  35)  concerning  the 
sword,  which,  he  says,  "meant  the  most  acute  pain,  cutting 

^  Ai'  rjs  TTaira  Trvoi]  iricTTivoxKia.  crdi^irai. 

*  E[(Te5e'|oTo. 

°  'AAA'  vlhv  favrhv  aXrj^ivh/'  elvat  Xtyaiv  tov  ■Kavrav  KparovvTos  Qeov,  rdx<^  ''^ou 
Kol  Sie(X<pdK\eTo. 

^  Or  woman's  nature,  rh  yvvaiov,  which  is  sometimes  used  in  a  contemptuous 
sense,  like  the  German  WeibsbUd. 

''  Th  ywaioy. 


948  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

down  the  woman's  mind  into  extravagant  tlioiiglits.  For 
temptations  test  the  hearts  of  those  who  suflPer  them,  and  make 
bare  the  thoughts  which  are  in  them."  ' 

Aside  from  his  partisan  excesses,  he  powerfully  and  suc- 
cessfully represented  the  important  truth  of  the  unity  of  the 
person  of  Christ  against  the  abstract  dyophysitism  of  Nes- 
torius. 

For  this  reason  his  Christologieal  writings  against  Kestorius 
and  Theodoret  are  of  the  greatest  importance  to  the  history  of 
doctrine.'^  Besides  these  he  has  left  us  a  valuable  apologetic 
work,  composed  in  the  year  433,  and  dedicated  to  the  emperor 
Theodosius  II.,  in  refutation  of  the  attack  of  Julian  the  Apostate 
upon  Christianity ; '  and  a  doctrinal  work  on  the  Trinity  and 

^  Cyril,  in  Joann.  lib.  xii,  (in  Migne's  ed.  of  Cyril,  vol.  vii.  col.  661  sq.).  Dr.  J. 
II.  Newman  (in  his  Letter  to  Dr.  Pusey  on  his  Eirenicon,  Lond.  1866,  p.  136) 
escapes  the  force  of  the  argument  of  this  and  similar  passages  of  Basil  and  Chrysos- 
tom  against  the  Roman  Mariolatry  by  the  sophistical  distinction,  that  they  are  not 
directed  against  the  Virgin's  person,  so  much  as  against  her  nature  {rh  yvvaiov),  of 
which  the  fathers  had  the  low  estimation  then  prevalent,  looking  upon  womankind 
as  the  "  varium  et  mutabile  semper,"  and  knowing  little  of  that  true  nobility  which 
is  exemphfied  in  the  females  of  the  Germanic  races,  and  in  those  of  the  old  Jewish 
stock,  Miriam,  Deborah,  Judith,  Susanna.  But  it  was  to  the  human  nature  of 
Mary,  and  not  to  human  nature  in  the  abstract,  that  Cyril,  whether  right  or  wrong, 
atti'ibuted  a  doubt  concerning  the  true  divinity  of  her  Son.  I  think  there  is  no 
warrant  for  such  a  supposition  in  the  accounts  of  the  crucifixion,  and  the  sword  in 
the  prophecy  of  Simeon  means  anguish  rather  than  doubt.  But  this  makes  the 
antagonism  of  these  Greek  fathers  with  the  present  Roman  Mariology  only  the  more 
striking.  Newman  (1.  c.  p.  144)  gratuitously  assumes  that  the  tradition  of  the 
sinlessness  of  the  holy  Virgin  was  obliterated  and  confused  at  Antioch  and  New 
Caesarea  by  the  Arian  troubles.  But  this  would  apply  at  best  only  to  Chrysostom 
and  Basil,  and  not  to  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  who  lived  half  a  century  after  the  defeat 
of  Arianism  at  the  second  ecumenical  council,  and  who  was  the  leading  champion  of 
the  theotokos  in  the  Nestorian  controversy.  Besides  there  is  no  clear  trace  of  tbe 
doctrine  of  the  sinlessness  of  Mary  before  St.  Augustine,  either  among  the  Greek  or 
Latin  fathers  ;  for  the  tradition  of  Mary  as  the  second  Eve  does  not  necessarily  im- 
ply that  doctrine,  and  was  associated  in  Irenaeus  and  TertulUan  with  views  similar  to 
those  expressed  by  Basil,  Chrysostom,  and  Cyril.     Comp.  §§  81  and  82,  above. 

°  Adversus  Nestorii  blasphemias  contradictionum  hbri  v  (Kara  rSiv  NecTTwpiov 
5v<T(pr],uioov  rrevrdfii^Aos  avTi^fi-qTos.) ;  Explanatio  xii  capitum  s.  anathematismorum 
('EwiAuo-is  rZv  5ctf56«a  KipaXaiuiv);  Apologeticus  pro  xii  capitibus  adversus  Orien- 
tales  episcopos ;  Contra  Theodoretum  pro  xii  capitibus — all  in  the  last  volume  of 
the  edition  of  Aubert  (in  Mignc,  in  tom.  ix.). 

*  Contra  Julianum  Apostatam  hbri  x,  tom.  vi.  in  Aubert  (tom.  ix.  in  Migne) ; 
also  in  Spanheim's  Opera  JuUani.     Comp.  §§  4  and  9,  above. 


A      * 


ta't*t 


§    172.      EPHE^M   THE    SYRIAN.  949 

the  incarnation.*  As  an  expositor  lie  has  the  virtues  and  the 
faults  of  the  arbitrary  allegorizing  and  dogmatizing  method 
of  the  Alexandrians,  and  with  all  his  copiousness  of  thought 
he  affords  far  less  solid  profit  than  Chrysostom  or  Thcodoret. 
He  has  left  extended  commentaries,  chiefly  in  the  form  of  ser- 
mons, on  the  Pentateuch  (or  rather  on  the  most  important 
sections  and  the  typical  significance  of  the  ceremonial  law), 
on  Isaiah,  on  the  twelve  Minor  Prophets,  and  on  the  Gospel  of 
John.''  To  these  must  now  be  added  fragments  of  expositions 
of  the  Psalms,  and  of  some  of  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  first  edited 
by  Angelo  Mai ;  and  a  homiletical  commentary  on  the  Gospel 
of  Luke,  which  likewise  has  but  recently  become  known,  first 
by  fragments  in  the  Greek  original,  and  since  complete  in  a 
Syriac  translation  from  the  manuscripts  of  a  Kitrian  monas- 
tery.' And,  finally,  the  works  of  Cyril  include  thirty  Easter 
Homilies  (Homilise  pasehales),  in  which,  according  to  Alexan- 
drian custom,  he  announced  the  time  of  Easter ;  several  homi- 
lies delivered  in  E23hesus  and  elsewhere ;  and  eighty-eight 
Letters,  relating  for  the  most  part  to  the  Nestorian  contro- 
versies." 

§  1Y2.     E])hr(£m  the  Syrian. 

I.  S.  Ephe^m  SyetjS  :  Opera  omnia  quse  exstant  Grasce,  Syriace,  Latine,  in 
sex  tomos  distributa,  ad  MSS.  codices  Vaticanos  aliosque  castigata, 
etc. :  nunc  primum,  sub  auspiciis  S.  P.  Clementis  XII.  Pontificis  Max. 
e  Bibl.  Vaticana  prodeunt.  Edited  by  the  celebrated  Oriental  scbolar 
J.  S.  Asseinani  (assisted  by  his  nephew  Stephen  Evodius  Assemani, 
and  the  Maronjte  Jesuit  Peter  Benedict).  Eoma?,  1732-'43,  6  vols. 
fol.  (vols,  i.-iii.  contain  the  Greek  and  Latin  translations ;  vols,  iv.-vi., 
which  are  also  separately  numbered  i.-iii., -the  Syriac  writings  with  a 
Latin  versio*>^«.^iSupplementary.  works  edited  by  the  Mechitarists, 
Yenet.  1836,  4  vols.  8vo7/  The  Hymns  of  Ephrgem  have  also  been  edited 
by  xVtjg.  Hahn  and  Fr.  L.  Sieffert  :    ChrestomsiAia  Svriaca  sive  S. 

'  De  S.  Trinitate,  et  de  incamatione  Unigeniti,  etc.,  torn.  v.  Pars  i.  Not  to  be 
confounded  with  the  spurious  work  De  trinitate,  in  torn.  vi.  1-35,  which  combats 
the  monotheUte  heresy,  and  is  therefore  of  much  later  origin. 

*  Tom.  i.-iv. 

'  By  Angelo  Mai  and  R.  P.  Smith.     See  the  Literature  above. 

*  The  Homihes  and  Letters  in  torn.  v.  Pars  ii.  ed.  Aubert  (in  Migne,  with  addi- 
tions, in  tom.  X.). 


950  THIKD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

EphrsBmi  carmina  selecta,  notis  criticis,  ptiilologicis,  historicis,  et  glos- 
sario  locupletissimo  illustr.,  Lips.  1825 ;  'hqld  by  Daniel  :  Thes.  liymn. 
torn.  iii.  (Lips.  1855)  pp.  139-268^ /German  translation  by  Zingeele: 
Die  beil.  Muse  der  Syrer.  Innsbruck,  1830.  EnglJsli  translation  by 
Henet  Buegess  :  Select  metrical  Hymns  and  Homilies  of  Ephr,  Syi'us, 
transl.  Lond.  1853,  2  vols.  12mo. '  Qomp.  §114,  abo«e. 
IL  Geegoeitjs  Ntss.  :  Vita  et  encomium  S.  Ephr.  Syr,  (in  Opera  Greg.  ed. 
Paris.  1615,  torn.  ii.  pp.  1027'-1048;  or  in  Migne's  ed.  of  Greg.  tom. 
iii.  819-850,  and  in  Eplir.  Op.  tom.  i.).  The  Vita  per  Metaphrastera ; 
several  anonymous  biographies ;  the  Testimonia  veterum  and  Judicia 
recentiorum ;  the  Dissertation  de  rebus  gestis,  scriptis,  editionibusque 
Ephr.  Syr.,  etc.,  all  in  the  first  volume,  and  the  Acta  Ephr83mi  Syriaca 
auctore  anonymo,  in  the  sixth  volume,  of  Assemani's  edition  of  the 
Opera  Ephr.  Jeeome:  Oat.  vir.  ill.  c.  115.  Sozomen:  H.  E.  iii.  c. 
16;  vi.  34.  Theodoret:  H.  E.  iv.  29.  Acta  Sanctoeum  for  Febr.  i. 
(Antw.1658),  pp.  67-78.  Butler:  The  Lives  of  the  Saints,  sub  July 
9.  W.  Cave:  Lives  of  the  Fathers,  &c.  Vol.  iii.  404-412  (Oxford 
ed.  of  1840).  Fabrioitjs:  Bibl.  Gr.  (reprinted  in  Assemani's  ed.  of 
the  Opera  i.  Ixiii.  sqq.).  Lengeeke  :  De  Ephrsemo  Syro  S.  Scripture 
interprete.  Hah  1828;  De  Ephr.  arte  hermeneutica,  Regiom.  1831. 
Alsleben:  Das  Leben  des  h.  Ephram.  Berlin,  1853.  E.  Eudigee: 
Art.  Ephram  in  Herzog's  Encykl.  vol.  iv.  (1855),  p.  85  &t  ^Ta/*   — — » 

Before  we  leave  the  Oriental  fathers,  we  must  give  a 
sketch  of  Ephejem  or  Epheaim,'  the  most  distinguished  divine, 
orator,  and  poet,  of  the  ancient  Syrian  church.  He  is  called 
"  the  pillar  of  the  church,"  "  the  teacher,"  "  the  prophet,  of  the 
Syrians,"  and  as  a  hymn-writer  "the  guitar  of  the  Holy 
Ghost."  His  life  was  at  an  early  date  interwoven  with  mira- 
culous legends,  and  it  is  impossible  to  sift  the  truth  from  pious 
fiction. 

He  was  born  of  heathen  parents  in  Mesopotamia  (either  at 
Edessa  or  at  Nisibis)  in  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century, 
and  was  expelled  from  home  by  his  father,  a  priest  of  the  god 
Abnil,  for  his  leaning  to  Christianity^^  He  went  to  the  vene- 
rated bishop  and  confessor  Jacob  of  Nisibis,  who  instructed 
and  probably  also  baptized  him,  took  him  to  the  council 
of  NicGea  in  325,  and  employed  liira  as  teacher.     He  soon 

'  The  Greeks  spell  his  name  'Etppai/x,  the  Latins  Ephrffim. 

^  Tliis  is  the  account  of  the  Syriac  Acta  Ephrtemi,  in  the  sixth  volume  of  the 
Opera,  p.  xxiii  sqq.  But  according  to  another  account,  which  is  followed  by  But- 
ler and  Cave,  his  parents  were  Christians,  and  dedicated  him  to  God  from  the  cradle. 


I 


^  ;  '^^;.../  d  vv^M^^  ^  ^  //^^  ^  XK^/^7^,2  ^5^-  ^^Z- 


V 


//,M^^  /i^w^  tr.  /n-  /^-^ 


I 


§   172.       EPim^M   THE   SYRIAN.  951 

acquired  great  celebrity  by  his  sacred  learning,  bis  zealous 
orthodoxy,  and  his  ascetic  piety.  In  363,  alter  the  cession  of 
Nisibis  to  the  Persians,  he  withdrew  to  Koman  territory,  and 
settled  in  Edessa,  which  about  that  time  became  the  chief  seat 
of  Christian  learning  in  Syria.*  He  lived  a  hermit  in  a  cavern 
near  the  city,  and  spent  his  time  in  ascetic  exercises,  in  read- 
ing, writing,  and  preaching  to  the  monks  and  the  people  with 
great  effect.  He  acquired  complete  mastery  over  his  naturally 
violent  temper,  he  denied  himself  all  pleasures,  and  slept  on 
the  bare  ground.  He  opposed  the  remnants  of  idolatry  in  the 
surrounding  country,  and  defended  the  Xicene  orthodoxy 
against  all  classes  of  heretics.  He  made  a  journey  to  Egypt, 
where  he  spent  several  years  among  the  hermits.  He  also 
visited,  by  divine  admonition,  Basil  the  Great  at  Csesarea,  who 
ordained  him  deacon.  Basil  held  him  in  the  highest  esteem, 
and  afterwards  sent  two  of  his  pupils  to  Edessa  to  ordain  him 
bishop ;  but  Ephraem,  in  order  to  escape  the  responsible  office, 
behaved  like  a  fool,  and  the  messengers  returned  with  the 
report  that  he  was  out  of  his  mind.  Basil  told  them  that  the 
folly  was  on  their  side,  and  Ephrsem  was  a  man  full  of  divine 
wisdom. 

Shortly  before  his  death,  when  the  city  of  Edessa  was 
visited  by  a  severe  famine,  Ephrsem  quitted  his  solitary  cell 
and  preached  a  powerful  sermon  against  the  rich  for  permitting 
the  poor  to  die  around  them,  and  told  them  that  their  wealth 
would  ruin  their  soul,  unless  they  made  good  use  of  it.  The 
rich  men  felt  the  rebuke,  and  intrusted  him  with  the  distribu- 
tion of  their  goods.  Ephroem  fitted  up  about  three  hundred 
beds,  and  himself  attended  to  the  sufferers,  whether  they  were 
foreigners  or  natives,  till  the  calamity  was  at  an  end.  Then 
he  returned  to  his  cell,  and  a  few  days  after,  about  the  year 
379,  he  expired,  soon  following  his  friend  Basil. 

Ephrtem,  says  Sozomen,  attained  no  higher  clerical  degree 
than  that  of  deacon,  but  his  attainments  in  virtue  rendered 

'  On  the  early  history  of  Christianity  in  Edessa,  compare  W.  Cureton  :  Ancient 
Syriac  Documents  relative  to  the  earliest  Establisliment  of  Christianity  in  Edessa 
and  the  neighboring  Countries,  from  the  Tear  after  our  Lord's  Ascension  to  the 
Beginning  of  the  Fourth  Century.     Lond.  1866. 


952  THrao  PEEioD.  A.D.  311-590. 

him  equal  in  reputation  to  those  who  rose  to  the  highest  sacer- 
dotal dignity,  while  his  holy  life  and  erudition  made  him  an 
object  of  universal  admiration.  He  left  many  disciples  who 
were  zealously  attached  to  his  doctrines.  The  most  celebrated 
of  them  were  Abbas,  Zenobius,  Abraham,  Maras,  and  Simeon, 
whom  the  S}Tians  regard  as  the  glory  of  their  country.' 

Ephrsem  was  an  uncommonly  prolific  author.  His  fertility 
was  prophetically  revealed  to  him  in  his  early  years  by  the 
vision  of  a  vine  which  grew  from  the  root  of  his  tongue, 
spreading  in  every  direction  to  the  ends  of  the  earth,  and  was 
loaded  with  new  and  heavier  clusters  tlie  more  it  was  plucked. 
His  writings  consist  of  commentaries  on  the  Scriptures,  homi- 
lies, ascetic  tracts,  and  sacred  poetry.  The  commentaries  and 
hymns,  or  metrical  prose,  are  preserved  in  the  Syriac  original, 
and  have  an  independent  philological  value  for  Oriental 
scholars.  Tlie  other  writings  exist  only  in  Greek,  Latin,  and 
Armenian  translations.  Excellent  Greek  translations  were 
known  and  extensively  read  so  early  as  the  time  of  Chrysos- 
tom  and  Jerome.  His  works  furnish  no  clear  evidence  of  his 
knowledge  of  the  Greek  language ;  some  writers  assert  his 
acquaintance  with  Greek,  others  deny  it.'' 

His  commentaries  extended  over  the  whole  Bible,  "  from 
the  book  of  creation  to  the  last  book  of  grace,"  as  Gregory  of 
ISTyssa  says.  We  have  his  commentaries  on  the  liistorical  and 
prophetical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the  Book  of  Job 
in  Syriac,  and  his  commentaries  on  the  Epistles  of  Paul  in  an 
Armenian  translation.'  They  have  been  but  little  used  tlnis  far 
by  commentators.     He  does  not  interpret  the  text  from   the 


'  Sozomen,  H.  E.  iii.  16.  Cave  (1.  c.  iii.  409)  says  of  him  :  "  He  had  all  the  vir- 
tues that  can  render  a  man  great  and  excellent,  and  this  that  crowned  all  the  rest, 
that  he  would  not  know  it,  nor  cared  to  hear  of  it ;  being  desirous,  as  Njssen  tell3 
us,  oil  SoKuv,  ciw"  ehai  xRvrrOs,  not  to  seem,  but  to  be  really  good." 

"  Sozomen  and  Theodoret  expressly  say  that  Epliram  was  not  acquainted  with 
the  Greek  language,  but  used  the  S}Tiac  "  as  a  medium  for  reflecting  the  rays  of 
divine  grace."  According  to  the  legend  he  was  miraculously  endowed  with  the 
knowledge  of  the  Greek  on  his  visit  to  Basil,  who  was  in  like  manner  inspired  to 
greet  him  in  Syriac. 

^  Opera,  torn.  iv.  and  v.,  or  vol.  i.  and  ii.  of  the  Opera  Syr.,  and  the  supplementa 
of  the  Mechitarists, 


§   172.      EPHE^M   THE   STEIAN.  953 

original  Hebrew,  but  from  tlie  old  Sjriac  translation,  the 
Peshito.' 

His  sermons  and  homilies,  of  which,  according  to  Photius, 
he  composed  more  tlian  a  thousand,  are  partly  expository, 
partly  polemical,  against  Jews,  heathen,  and  heretics."  They 
evince  a  considerable  degree  of  popular  eloquence ;  they  are 
full  of  pathos,  exclamations,  apostrophes,  antitheses,  illustra- 
tions, severe  rebuke,  and  sweet  comfort,  according  to  the 
subject;  but  also  full  of  exaggerations,  bombast,  prolixity,  and 
the  superstitious  of  his  age,  such  as  the  over-estimate  of 
ascetic  virtue,  and  excessive  veneration  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  the 
saints,  and  relics.^  Some  of  his  sermons  were  publicly  read 
after  the  Bible  lesson  in  many  Oriental  and  even  Occidental 
churches.* 

His  hymns  were  intended  to  counteract  the  influence  of  the 
heretical  views  of  Bardesanes  and  his  son  Harmonius,  which 
spread  widely  by  means  of  popular  Syrian  songs.  "  When 
Ephrsem  perceived,"  says  Sozomen,  "  that  the  Syiians  were 
charmed  with  the  elegant  diction  and  melodious  versification 
of  Harmonius,  he  became  apprehensive,  lest  they  should  im- 
bibe the  same  opinions ;  and  therefore,  although  he  was  igno- 
rant of  Greek  learning,  he  applied  himself  to  the  study  of  the 
metres  of  Harmonius,  and  composed  similar  poems  in  accord- 
ance with  the  doctrines  of  the  church,  and  sacred  hymns  in 
praise  of  holy  men.  From  that  period  the  Syi'ians  sang  the 
odes  of  Ephrsem,  according  to  the  method  indicated  by  Har- 
monius." Theodoret  gives  a  similar  account,  and  says,  that 
the  hymns  of  Ephrsem  combined  harmony  and  melody  with 
piety,  and  subserved  all  the  purposes  of  valuable  and  efficacious 

'  He  refers,  however,  occasionally  to  the  original,  as,  for  instance,  ad  Gen.  i.  1 : 
"  Interjecta  particula  px  ,  quae  in  Hebraico  textu  h^c  loco  legitur,  idem  valet,  quod         (y 
Syriacus  articulus  -^  ."     (Opera,  vi.  116.)    But  such  references  prove  no  more  than 
a  superficial  knowledge  of  Hebrew. 

^  Opera,  torn.  i.  ii.  iii.  and  iv.     Compare  Photius,  Bibl.  cod.  196. 

'  There  is  even  a  prayer  to  the  holy  Virgin  (in  Latin  only)  m  his  Works,  tom.  iiL 
p.  5 77;  if  it  be  genuine;  for  there  are  no  other  clear  traces  of  such  prayers  before 
the  fifth  century.  Mary  is  there  addressed  as  "  immaculata  .  .  .  atque  ab  orani 
?orde  ac  labe  peccati  alienissima,  virgo  Dei  sponsa,  ac  Domina  nostra,"  etc. 

*  Hieron.  De  script,  eccl.  c.  115. 


954  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

medicine  against  the  heretical  hymns  of  Harmonius.  It  is  re- 
ported that  he  wrote  no  less  than  three  hundred  thousand 
verses.'  But,  with  the  exception  of  his  commentaries,  all  his 
Syriac  works  are  written  in  verse,  i.  e.,  in  lines  of  an  equal 
number  of  syllables,  and  with  occasional  rhyme  and  assonance, 
though  without  regular  metre.'' 

^  Sozomen,  iii.  16:  rpiaKocrias  fivpidSas  eiruv, — gTrrj  and  arixoi  is  equivalent  to 
verses  or  lines.     Origen  says  of  the  Book  of  Job  that  it  contains  nearly  10,000 

'  Comp.  RoDiGER,  in  Herzog's  Encycl.  vol.  iv.  p.  89,  and  (the,  Observationes  pro- 
sodicae  of  Hahn  and  Siefferx  in  their  Chrestomathia  Syriaca.  ^  (■•<-  v  ';•    >■  •  '•^■ 


yrwirv^ 


II. — The  Latin  Fathers. 

§  173.     Ladantius. 

I.  Lactaxtius,  Lucius  Csecilius  Eirmianus :  Opera.  First  edition  in  vene- 
rabili  monasterio  Sublacensi,  1465.  (Brunei:  "Livre  pr^cieux,  qui 
est  en  meme  temps  la  premiere  edition  de  Lactance,  et  le  premier 
ouvrage  impr.  en  Italie  avec  date.")  Later  editions  by  J.  L.  Brune- 
mann,  Lips,  1739 ;  Le  Brun  and  N.  Lenglet  Du  Fremoy^  Par.  1748,  2 
vols.  4to;  F.  E.  a  S.  Xaverio,  Rom.  l754r-'9,  and  Migne,  Par.  1844, 
in  2  vols.  A  convenient  manual  edition  by  0.  Fridol.  FritzscJie,  in 
Gersdorf  s  Bibliotheca  Patrum  ecclesiast.  sekcta,  Lips.  1842,  vol.  's..  ,  ?  /i    . 

andxi.  ^V^^  ^»*^ec^H^L^^.  yr^^a^^  u,  (SPu^^^y^^^ 

n.  The  introductory  essays  to  the  editions.    Jeeome  :  Cat.  vir.  illustr.  c.  ^^j^/'S^*-^ 
80.     Notices  in  Dupdt,  Ceillier,  Cave  (vol.  iii.  pp.  373-384),  Sohone-  '^'^r9t4<^ 
MAXX  (Biblioth.  Patr.  Lat.  i.  177  sqq.),  &c.     Mohler:  Patrologie,  i.  ^'^^'^  rV;!^ 
pp.  917-933.y,  On  the  Christology  of  Lactantius,  comp.  Doexer  :  Ent-  "^^X/T/^ 
wicklungsgeschichte  der  Lehre  von  der  Person  Christi.     Th.  i.  p.  '^^^t*^ 
761  ff. 


-^x 


FiEMiANus  Lactantius  stands  among  tlie  Latin  fathers,  like 
Eusebius  among  the  Greek,  on  the  border  between  the  second 
period  and  the  third,  and  unites  in  his  reminiscences  the  per- 
sonal experience  of  both  the  persecution  and  the  victory  of  the 
church  in  the  Roman  empire ;  yet  in  his  theological  views  he 
belongs  rather  to  the  ante-Nicene  age. 

According  to  his  own  confession  he  sprang  from  heathen 
parents.  He  was  probably,  as  some  have  inferred  from  his 
name,  a  native  of  Firmum  (Fermo)  in  Italy;  he  studied  in 
the  school  of  the  rhetorician  and  apologist  Arnobius  of  Sicca, 
and  ofi  this  account  has  been  taken  by  some  for  an  African ; 
he  made  himself  known  by  a  poetical  work  called  Symposion, 
a  collection  of  a  hundred  riddles  in  hexameters  for  table 
amusement ;  and  he  was  called  to  Nicomedia  by  Dioclesian  to 
teach  Latin  eloquence.  But  as  this  city  was  occupied  mostly 
by  Greeks,  he  had  few  hearers,  and  devoted  himself  to  author- 


956  THIED   PEKIOD,    A.D.    311-590. 

ship.'  In  his  manhood,  probably  shortly  before  or  during  the 
persecution  under  Dioclesian,  he  embraced  Christianity;  he 
was  witness  of  the  cruel  scenes  of  that  persecution,  though  not 
himself  a  sufferer  in  it ;  and  he  wrote  in  defence  of  the  hated 
and  reviled  religion. 

Constantine  subsequently  (after  312)  brought  him  to  his 
court  in  Gaul,  and  committed  to  him  the  education  of  his  son 
Crispus,  whom  the  emperor  caused  to  be  executed  in  326.  At 
court  he  lived  very  simply,  and  withstood  the  temptations  of 
luxury  and  avarice.  He  is  said  to  have  died  in  the  imj^erial 
residence  at  Treves  at  a  great  age,  about  the  year  330. 

Jerome  calls  Lactantius  the  most  learned  man  of  his  time." 
His  writings  certainly  give  evidence  of  varied  and  thorough 
knowledge,  of  fine  rhetorical  culture,  and  particularly  of  emi- 
nent power  of  statement  in  clear,  pure,  and  elegant  style.  In 
this  last  respect  he  surpasses  almost  all  the  Latin  fathers,  except 
Jerome,  and  has  not  unjustly  been  called  the  Christian  Cicero.' 
His  is  the  famous  derivation  of  the  word  religion  from  religare, 
defining  it  as  the  reunion  of  man  with  God,  reconciliation ; 
answering  to  the  nature  of  Christianity,  and  including  the  three 
ideas  of  an  original  unity,  a  separation  by  sin,  and  a  restoration 
of  the  unity  again.* 

'  He  says  of  his  heathen  life,  Inst.  div.  i.  1,  that  he  trained  youth  by  his  rhetoric 
"  non  ad  virtutem,  sed  plane  ad  a.rgutam  malitiam." 

^  Catal.  c.  80 :  "  Lact.  vir  omnium  suo  tempore  eruditissimus."  In  Ep.  58  ad 
Paulinum  (ed.  Vail.),  c.  10,  he  gives  the  following  just  view  of  him :  "  Lact.  quasi 
quidam  fluvius  eloquentise  TuUianas,  utinam  tarn  nostra  affirmare  potuisset,  quam 
facile  aliena  destruxit."  0.  Fri^dol.  Fkitzsche,  in  the  Prsefatio  of  his  edition  of 
his  Opera,  thus  estimates  him ;  "  Firm.  Lactantius,  qui  Ciceronis  felicissimus  exstitit 
imitator,  non  solum  sermonis  castitate  et  elegantia  orationisque  flumine,  sed,  qua 
erat  summa  eruditione,  rerum  etiam  copia  et  varietate  inter  reliquos  ecclesiaj  latinse 
scriptores  maxime  eminuit,  eoque  factum  est,  ut,  quamvis  doctrinam  ejus  non  satis 
esse  sanam  viros  pios  haud  lateret,  nunquam  tamen  prorsus  neghgeretur." 

^  Or,  as  Jerome,  1.  c,  calls  him:  "Fluvius  eloquentise  TuUianae." 

••  Instit.  div.  1.  iv.  cap.  28  (vol.  i.  p.  223,  ed.  Fritzsche) :  "  Hoc  vinculo  pietatia 
obstricti  Deo  et  rehgati  sumus ;  unde  ipsa  religio  nomen  accepit,  non  ut  Cicero 
interpretatus  est,  a  relegendo."  Cicero  says,  De  natura  deorum,  ii.  28  :  "  Qui  omnia 
quai  ad  cultum  deorum  pertinerent,  diligenter  retractarent  ct  tamquam  relegerent, 
religiosi  dicti  sunt  ex  rclegendoy  ut  elegantes  ex  eligendo,  itemque  ex  diligendo 
diligentcs."  This  derivation  is  not  impossible,  since  we  have  legio  from  Icgcre,  and 
several  nouns  ending  in  io  from  verbs  of  the  third  conjugation,  as  regio,  conlagio. 


'  ^.-c-e. 


^  J^^,^^/'.^^/6./«<^4/   J'^X^tz/^^'^  ^^^.^^Z^,  A^-ac^^^_^ 

^  ^a£e  ^f«ri^e.<^^  ,^  f^^  ^'^'^^  f'^ 


§    173.      LACTANTIUS.  957 

But  he  is  far  more  the  rhetorician  than  the  philosopher  or 
theologian,  and,  as  Jerome  observes,  has  greater  skill  in  the 
refutation  of  error  tlian  in  the  establishment  of  truth.  The 
doctrinal  matter  of  his  writings,  as  in  the  case  of  his  preceptor 
Arnobius,  is  very  vague  and  unsatisfactory,  and  he  does  not 
belong  to  the  narrower  circle  of  the  fathers,  the  authoritative 
teachers  of  the  church.  Pope  Gelasius  counted  his  works 
among  the  apocrypha,  i.  e.,  writings  not  ecclesiastically  re- 
ceived. 

Notwithstanding  this,  his  Institutes,  on  account  of  their 
elegant  style,  have  been  favorite  reading,  and  are  said  to  have 
appeared  in  more  than  a  hundred  editions.  His  mistakes  and 
errors  in  the  exposition  of  points  of  Christian  doctrine  do  not 
amount  to  heresies,  but  are  mostly  due  to  the  crude  and  un- 
settled state  of  the  church  doctrine  at  the  time.  In  the  doc- 
trine of  sin  he  borders  upon  Manichseisra.  In  anthropology 
and  soteriology  he  follows  the  synergism  which,  until  Augus- 
tine, was  almost  universal.  In  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  he 
was,  like  most  of  the  ante-Nicene  fathers,  subordinationist.  He 
taught  a  duplex  nativitas  of  Christ,  one  at  the  creation,  and 
one  at  the  incarnation.  Christ  went  forth  from  God  at  the  ^^ 
creation,  as  a  word  from  the  mouth,  yet  hypostatically.'  -^  ^  ^ 

His  most  important  work  is  his  Divine  Institutes,  a  com- 
prehensive refutation  of  heathenism  and  defence  of  Christianity, 
designed  to  make  Christianity  better  known  among  the  cul- 
tivated classes,  and  to  commend  it  by  scholarship  and  attract- 
ive style.''     He  seems  to  have  begun  the  work  during  the  Dio- 

oblivio.  But  the  derivation  of  Lactantius  gives  a  more  correct  and  profound  idea 
of  religion,  and  etymologically  it  is  equally  admissible ;  for  although  religare  would 
rather  yield  the  noun  religatio,  yet  we  have  optio  from  optare,  rebelHo  from  rebellare 
internecio  from  internecare,  &c.  Augustine  (Retract,  i.  13),  Jerome  (Ad  Amos,  c.  9), 
and  the  majority  of  Christian  divines  have  adopted  the  definition  of  Lactantius. 

*  Accordmg  to  a  statement  of  Jerome  (Ep.  41  ad  Pammach.  et  Ocean.)  he  denied 
the  personality  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

^  Institutionum  divinarum  libri  vii.  The  title  was  chosen  with  reference  to  the 
Institutiones  juris  civilis  (i.  1).  The  several  books  then  bear  the  following  super- 
scriptions:  1.  De  falsa  religione;  2.  De  origine  erroris;  3.  De  falsa  sapientia; 
4.  De  vera  sapientia ;  5.  De  justitia ;  6.  De  vero  cultu  ;  7.  De  vita  beata.  Lactan- 
tius himself  made  an  abstract  of  it  under  the  title :  Epitome  ad  Pentadium  fratrem, 
in  Friizsche,  Pars  ii.  pp.  114-171. 


958  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

clesianic  persecution,  but  afterwards  to  have  enlarged  and 
improved  it  about  tbe  year  321 ;  for  he  dedicated  it  to  the 
emperor,  whom  he  celebrates  as  the  first  Christian  prince.' 

To  the  same  apologetic  purpose  was  his  work  De  morte,  or 
mortibus,  persecutorum,  which  is  of  some  importance  to  the 
external  history  of  the  church.^  It  describes  with  minute 
knowledge,  but  in  vehement  tone,  the  cruel  persecutions  of  the 
Christians  from  K"ero  to  Dioclesian,  Galerius,  and  Maximinus 
(314),  and  the  divine  judgments  on  the  persecutors,  who  were 
compelled  to  become  involuntary  witnesses  to  the  indestruc- 
tible power  of  Christianity. 

In  his  book  De  opificio  Dei '  he  gives  observations  on  the 
organization  of  the  human  nature,  and  on  the  divine  wisdom 
displayed  in  it. 

In  the  treatise  De  ira  Dei^  he  shows  that  the  punitive 
justice  of  God  necessarily  follows  from  his  abhorrence  of  evil, 
and  is  perfectly  compatible  with  his  goodness ;  and  he  closes 
with  an  exhortation  to  live  such  a  life  that  God  may  ever  be 
gracious  to  us,  and  that  we  may  never  have  to  fear  his 
wrath. 

We  have  also  from  Lactantius  various  Fragmenta  and 
Garmina  de  Phoenice,  de  Passione  Domini,  de  resurrectione 
Domini,  and  one  hundred  ^nigmata,  each  of  three  hexam- 
eters.* 

'  L.  i.  c.  1 :  "  Quod  opus  nunc  nominis  tui  auspicio  inchoamus,  Constantine 
imperator  maxime,  qui  primus  Romanorum  principum,  repudiatis  erroribus,  majes. 
tatem  Dei  singularis  ac  veri  cognovisti  et  honorasti,"  &c.  This  passage,  by  the 
way,  does  not  appear  in  all  the  codices.  Comp.  the  note  in  the  ed.  of  Fritzsche, 
Pars  i.  p.  3. 

"  In  the  ed.  of  Fritzsche,  P.  ii.  pp.  248-286.  This  work  is  wanting  in  the  earlier 
editions,  and  also  in  several  manuscripts,  and  is  therefore  sometimes  denied  to  Lac- 
tantius, e.  g.,  by  Dora  de  Nourry,  in  a  learned  dissertation  on  this  question,  reprinted 
in  the  Appendix  to  the  second  volume  of  Migne's  edition  of  Lactantius,  p.  839  sqq. 
But  its  style,  upon  the  whole,  agrees  with  his ;  the  work  entirely  suits  his  time  and 
circumstances ;  and  it  is  probably  the  same  that  Jerome  cites  under  the  name  De 
persecutione.  Jac.  Burckhardt,  in  his  monograph  on  Constantine  the  Great,  1853, 
treats  this  book  throughout  as  an  untrustworthy  romance,  but  without  proof,  and 
with  an  obvious  aversion  to  all  the  fathers,  sunilar  to  that  of  Gibbon. 

^  In  the  ed.  of  Fritzsche,  Pars  ii.  pp.  1*72-208. 

*  Ibid.  ii.  208-247. 

'  Ibid.  ii.  p.  28G  sqq.    Other  works  of  Lactantius,  cited  by  Jerome,  are  lost. 


02^_ 


§   174.       HILAET   OF   P0ITIEE8.  959 


§  174.    Hila^^y  of  Poitiers. 

L  S.  HiLAEirs  Pictaviensis :  Opera,  stndio  et  labore  monacli.  S.  Bene- 
dicti  e  congreg.  S,  Mauri.  Paris,  1693,  1  vol.  fol.  The  same  ed.  en- 
larged and  improved  by  Scip.  Maffei,  Verona,  1730,  2  vols.  fol.  (re- 
printed in  Venice,  1749).  An  ed.  by  Fr.  Overthur,  Wirceburgi,  1785- 
'88,  4  vols. ;  and  one  by  2Iigne,  Petit-Montronge,  1844r-'45,  in  2  vols. 
(Patrol.  Lat.  tom.  is.  and  x.). 

n.  The  Prsefatio  et  Vitee  in  the  first  vol.  of  the  ed.  of  Mafi"ei,  and  Migne 

(tom.  i.  125  sqq.).     HiEEomnnjs:  De  viris  illustr.  c.  100.  ^Tillemont 

(tom.  vii.);  Oeilliee  (tom.  v.);  and  Butler,  sub  Jan.  14?  'Klixg,  in 

Herzog's  Encykl.  vi.  84  fi'.^  On  the  Christology  of  Hilary,   comp. 

"^      especially  Dobs^ee,  Entwicklungsgeschichte,  i.  1037  ff. 

Hilary  of  Poitiers,  or  Pictaviensis,  so  named  fi-om  his 
birth-place  and  subsequent  bishopric  in  Southwestern  France, 
and  so  distinguished  from  other  men  of  the  same  name/  was 
especially  eminent  in  the  Arian  controversies  for  his  steadfast 
confession  and  powerful  defence  of  the  orthodox  faith,  and  has 
therefore  been  styled  the  "  Athanasius  of  the  "West." 

He  was  born  towards  the  end  of  the  third  century,  and 
embraced  Christianity  in  mature  age,  with  his  wife  and  his 
daughter  Apra."*  He  found  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  the  solu- 
tion of  the  riddle  of  life,  which  he  had  sought  in  vain  in  the 
writings  of  the  philosophers.  In  the  year  350  he  became 
bishop  of  his  native  city,  and  immediately  took  a  very  decided 
stand  against  Arianism,  which  was  at  that  time  devastating 
the  Gallic  church.  For  this  he  was  banished  by  Coustantius 
to  Phrygia  in  Asia  Minor,  where  Arianism  ruled.  Here, 
between  356  and  361,  he  wrote  his  twelve  books  on  the  Trini- 
ty, the  main  work  of  his  life.^  He  was  recalled  to  Gaul,  then 
banished  again,  and  spent  the  last  years  of  his  hfe  in  rural 
retirement  till  his  death  in  368. 

TVe  have  from  him,  besides  the  theological  work  already 
mentioned,  several  smaller  polemic  works  against  Arianism, 

'  As  Hilarius  Arelatensis  (f  449),  celebrated  for  his  contest  with  pope  Leo  I. 

2  We  have  from  him  an  Epistola  ad  Apram  (or  Abram  in  other  manuscripts), 
filiam  suam,  written  in  358,  in  tom.  ii.  549  (ed.  Migne).  He  sent  to  her  his  famous 
morning  hymn :  "  Lucis  largitor  splendide." 

'  De  trinitate  hbri  xii.  (tom.  i.  25-472,  ed.  Migne). 


960  THIKD   PEKIOD,    A.D.    311-590. 

viz.,  On  Synods,  or  the  Faith  of  the  Orientals  (358) ;  fragments 
of  a  history  of  the  Synod  of  Ariminnm  and  Seleucia ;  a  tract 
against  the  Arian  emperor  Constantius,  and  one  against  the 
Arian  bisliop  Aiixentius  of  Milan.  lie  wrote  also  Commenta- 
ries on  the  Psalms  (incomplete),  and  the  Gospel  of  Matthew, 
which  are  partly  a  free  translation  of  Origen,'  and  some  origi- 
nal hymns,  which  place  him  next  to  Ambrose  among  the  lyric 
poets  of  the  ancient  church. 

Hilary  was  a  man  of  thorough  biblical  knowledge,  theolog- 
ical depth  and  acuteness,  and  earnest,  efficient  piety.  He  had 
schooled  himself  in  the  works  of  Origen  and  Athanasius,  but 
was  at  the  same  time  an  independent  thinker  and  investigator. 
His  language  is  often  obscure  and  heavy,  but  earnest  and 
strong,  recalling  Tertullian.  He  had  to  reproduce  the  pro- 
found thoughts  of  Athanasius  and  other  Greek  fathers  in  the 
Latin  language,  which  is  far  less  adapted  to  speculation  than 
the  copious,  versatile,  finely-shaded  Greek.  The  incarnation 
of  God  was  to  him,  as  it  was  to  Athanasius,  the  centre  of 
theology  and  of  the  Christian  life.  He  had  an  effective  hand 
in  the  development  of  the  dogma  of  the  consubstantiality  of 
the  Son  with  the  Father,  and  the  dogma  of  the  person  of 
Christ.  In  this  he  was  specially  eminent  for  his  fine  use  of  the 
Gospel  of  John,  But  he  could  not  get  clear  of  subordination- 
ism,  nor  call  the  Holy  Ghost  downright  God.  His  Pneuma- 
tology,  as  well  as  his  anthropology  and  soteriology,  was,  like 
that  of  all  the  fathers  before  Augustine,  comparatively  crude. 
In  Christology  he  saw  farther  and  deeper  than  many  of  his 
contemporaries.  He  made  the  distinction  clear  between  the 
divine  and  the  human  in  Christ,  and  yet  held  firmly  to  the 
unity  of  His  person.  He  supposes  a  threefold  birth  of  the  Son 
of  God  :  the  eternal  generation  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  to 
whom  the  Son  is  equal  in  essence  and  glory ;  the  incarnation, 
the  humiliation  of  Himself  to  the  form  of  a  servant  from  the 
free  impulse  of  love ;  and  the  birth  of  the  Son  of  God  out  of 

'  Jerome  (De  viris  illustr.  c.  100)  says  of  his  Commentary  on  the  Psahns :  "  In 
quo  opere  imitatus  Origenem,  nonnulla  etiam  de  suo  addidit,"  and  of  the  Commen- 
tary on  Matthew  and  the  tract  on  Job :  "  Quos  de  GrffiCO  Origenis  ad  sensum  trans- 
tulit." 


§  175.      AMBROSE.  961 

the  Son  of  Man  in  tlie  resurrection,  the  transfiguration  of  the 
form  of  a  servant  into  the  form  of  God,  at  once  showing 
forth  again  the  full  glory  of  God,  and  realizing  the  idea  of 
humanity.' 

§  175.     Ambrose. 

I.  S.  Ambrosius  Mediolanensis  episcopus :  Opera  ad  manuscriptos  codices 

Vaticanos,  Gallicanos,  Belgicos,  &c.,  emendata,  studio  et  labore  mona- 
chorum  ord.  S.  Benedicti  e  congreg.  S.  Mauri  {Jac.  du  FricTie  et  Mc. 
de  Nourry).  Paris.  1686-'90,  2  vols.  fol.  This  edition  was  reprinted 
at  Venice,  1748-'51,  in  4  vols,  fol.,  and  in  1781  in  8  vols.  4to,  and  by 
Abbe  Migne  in  his  Patrol.,  Petit-Montrouge,  1843,  2  torn,  in  4  Parts 
with  some  additions.  The  Libri  tres  de  ofEciis,  and  the  Hesaemeron 
of  Ambrose  have  also  been  frequently  published  separately.  A  con- 
venient edition  of  both  is  included  in  Gersdorfs  Bibliotheca  Patrum 
Latinorum  selecta,  vols.  viii.  and  ix.  Lips.  1839.  His  hymns  are  found 
also  in  DanieVs  Thesaurus  hymnolog.  torn.  i.  p.  12  sqq. 

II.  Paulinus  (deacon  of  Milan  and  secretary  of  Ambrose) :  Vita  S.  Am- 

brosii  (written  by  request  of  St.  Augustine,  derived  from  personal 
knowledge,  from  Marcella,  sister  of  Ambrose,  and  several  friends). 
The  Vita  of  an  anonymous  writer,  in  Greek  and  Latin,  in  the  Bened. 
ed.  of  the  Opera.  Both  in  the  Appendix  to  tom.  ii.  ed.  Beuedictina). 
Benedictini  Editoees:  Vita  Ambrosii  ex  ejus  potissimum  scriptis 
coUecta  et  secundum  chronologiis  ordinem  digesta,  in  the  Bened.  ed., 
in  the  Appendix  to  tom.  ii.,  and  in  Migne's  reprint,  tom.  1.  (very 
thorough  and  instructive).  Comp.  also  the  Selecta  veterum  testimo- 
nia  de  S.  Ambr.  in  the  same  editions.  The  biographies  of  HEEJIA^;T 
(1678),  TiLLEMONT  (tom.  X.  pp.  78-306),  Vagliano  (Sommario  degli 
archivescovi  di  Milano),  Butler  (sub  Dec.  7),  Soheockh,  Bohringer,  Oi'  a  /vr^ 
J.  P.  SiLBERT  (Das  Leben  des  heiligen  Ambrosius,  Wien,  1841).  Jr-  ^^*\1 

Ambrose,  son  of  the  governor  (praefectus)  of  Gaul,  which       «-  nM^'^V 
was  one  of  the  three  great  dioceses  of  the  "Western  empire,    '^  ^  -'' 

was  born  at  Treves  (Treviri)  about  340,  educated  at  Rome  for  :j^^*^'/o<''^ 
the  highest  civil  ofiices,  and  after  greatly  distinguishing  him-  f^^f.f^'^r:* 
self  as  a  rhetorician,  was  elected  imperial  president  (praetor)  of  '•-     ■        '"" 

'  Kling  says,  1.  c.  p.  94 :  "  Hilary  holds  a  most  important  place  in  the  develop- 
ment of  Christology,  and  his  massive  analysis  contains  fruitful  germs  which  in  the 
succeeding  centuries  have  been  only  in  part  developed ;  profound  and  comprehen- 
sive thoughts,  the  stimulating  and  fertilizing  power  of  which  reaches  down  even  into 
our  own  time ;  nor  need  our  time  be  ashamed  to  learn  from  this  ancient  master,  as 
well  as  from  other  teachers  of  that  age." 
VOL.  II. — 61 


dj.'Pmv^ 


urn- 


962  THIED  PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Upper  Italy;  whereupon  Probus,  prefect  of  Italy,  gave  him 
the  remarkable  advice,  afterwards  interpreted  as  an  involun- 
tary prophecy :  "  Go,  and  act  not  the  judge,  but  the  bishop." 
He  administered  this  oiSce  with  justice  and  mildness,  enjoying 
universal  esteem. 

The  episcopal  chair  of  Milan,  the  second  capital  of  Italy, 
and  frequently  the  residence  of  the  emperors,  was  at  that  time 
occupied  by  the  Cappadocian,  Auxentius,  the  head  of  the 
Arian  party  in  the  West.  Soon  after  the  arrival  of  Ambrose, 
Auxentius  died.  A  division  then  arose  among  the  people  in 
the  choice  of  a  successor,  and  a  dangerous  riot  threatened. 
Tlie  governor  considered  it  his  duty  to  allay  the  storm.  But 
while  he  was  yet  speaking  to  the  people,  the  voice  of  a  child 
suddenly  rang  out :  "  Let  Ambrose  be  bishop  !  "  It  seemed  a 
voice  of  God,  and  Avians  and  Catholics  cried,  Amen. 

Ambrose  was  at  that  time  a  catechumen,  and  therefore  not 
even  baptized.  He  was  terrified,  and  seized  all  possible,  and 
even  most  eccentric,  means  to  escape  the  responsible  office. 
He  was  obliged  to  submit,  was  baptized,  and  eight  days  after- 
wards, in  374,  was  consecrated  bishop  of  Milan.  His  friend, 
Basil  the  Great  of  Csesarea,  was  delighted  that  God  had  chosen 
such  a  man  to  so  important  a  post,  who  counted  noble  birth, 
wealth,  and  eloquence  loss,  that  he  might  win  Christ. 

From  this  time  forward  Ambrose  lived  wholly  for  the 
church,  and  became  one  of  the  greatest  bishops  of  ancient 
Christendom,  full  of  Roman  dignity,  energy,  and  administra- 
tive wisdom,  and  of  the  unction  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  He  began 
his  work  with  the  sale  of  his  great  estates  and  of  his  gold  and 
silver  for  the  benefit  of  the  poor;  reserving  an  allowance  for 
his  pious  sister  Marcella  or  Marcellina,  who  in  early  youth  had 
taken  the  vow  of  virginity.  "With  voluntary  poverty  he  asso- 
ciated the  strictest  regimen  of  the  ascetic  spirit  of  his  time ; 
accepted  no  invitations  to  banquets ;  took  dinner  only  on  Sun- 
day, Saturday,  and  the  festivals  of  celebrated  martyrs ;  devoted 
the  greater  part  of  the  night  to  prayer,  to  the  hitherto  neces- 
sarily neglected  study  of  the  Scriptures  and  the  Greek  fathers, 
and  to  theological  writing ;  preached  every  Sunday,  and  often 
in  the  week;  was  accessible  to  all,  most  accessible  to  the  poor 


§   175.      AMBROSE.  963 

and  needy;  and  administered  his  spiritual  oversight,  par- 
ticularly his  instruction  of  catechumens,  with  the  greatest 
fidelity. 

The  Arians  he  vigorously  opposed  by  word  and  act,  and 
contributed  to  the  victory  of  the  Nicene  faith  in  the  West. 
In  this  work  he  behaved  himself  towards  the  Arian  empress 
Justin  a  with  rare  boldness,  dignity,  and  consistency,  in  the 
heroic  spirit  of  an  Athanasius.  The  court  demanded  the  ces- 
sion of  a  catholic  church  for  the  use  of  the  Arians,  and  claimed 
for  them  equal  rights  with  the  orthodox.  But  Ambrose  as- 
serted the  entire  independence  of  the  church  towards  the  state, 
and  by  perseverance  came  off  victorious  in  the  end.  It  was 
his  maxim,  that  the  emperor  is  in  the  church,  but  not  over  the 
church,  and  therefore  has  no  right  to  the  church  buildings. 

He  did  not  meddle  in  secular  matters,  nor  ask  favor  of  the 
magistracy,  except  when  he  could  put  in  a  word  of  interces- 
sion for  the  unfortunate  and  for  persons  condemned  to  death 
in  those  despotic  times.  This  enabled  him  to  act  the  more 
independently  in  his  spiritual  office,  as  a  real  prince  of  the 
church,  fearless  even  of  the  emperor  himself.  Thus  he  declar- 
ed to  the  usurper  Maximus,  who  desired  church  fellowship, 
that  he  would  never  admit  him,  unless  he  should  do  sincere 
penance  for  the  murder  of  the  emperor  Gratian. 

When  the  Roman  prefect,  Symmachus,  the  noblest  and 
most  eloquent  advocate  of  the  decaying  heathenism  of  his  time, 
implored  the  emperor  Valentmian,  in  an  apology  for  the  altar 
of  Victory  which  stood  in  the  hall  of  the  Roman  senate,  to 
tolerate  the  worship  and  the  sanctuaries  of  the  ancient  gods, 
Ambrose  met  him  with  an  admirable  reply,  and  prevented  the 
granting  of  his  request. 

The  most  imposing  appearance  of  our  bishop  against  the 
temporal  power  was  in  his  dealing  with  Theodosius,  when  this 
truly  great,  but  passionate  and  despotic,  emperor,  enraged  at 
Tliessalonica  for  a  riot,  had  caused  many  thousand  innocent 
persons  to  be  put  to  death  with  the  guilty,  and  Ambrose, 
interesting  himself  for  the  unfortunate,  like  a  Nathan  with 
David,  demanded  repentance  of  the  emperor,  and  refused  him 
the  holy  communion.     "  How  wilt  thou,"  said  he  to  him  in 


964  THIKD   PERIOD.    A.t).    311-590. 

the  vestibule  of  the  church,  "  how  wilt  thou  lift  up  in  prayer 
the  hands  still  dripping  with  the  blood  of  the  murdered? 
How  wilt  thou  receive  with  such  hands  the  most  holy  body  of 
the  Lord  ?  How  wilt  thou  bring  to  thy  mouth  his  precious 
blood?  Get  thee  away,  and  dare  not  to  heap  crime  upon 
crime."  "When  Theodosius  appealed  to  David's  murder  and 
adultery,  the  bishop  answered :  "  Well,  if  thou  hast  imitated 
David  in  sin,  imitate  him  also  in  repentance."  '  The  emperor 
actually  submitted  to  ecclesiastical  discipline,  made  pubhc  con- 
fession of  his  sin,  and  did  not  receive  absolution  until  he  had 
issued  a  law  that  the  sentence  of  death  should  never  be  exe- 
cuted till  thirty  days  after  it  was  pronounced.^ 

From  this  time  the  relation  between  Ambrose  and  Theodo- 
sius continued  undistm-bed,  and  the  emperor  is  reported  to 
have  said  afterwards  with  reference  to  the  bishop,  that  he  had 
recently  found  the  first  man  who  told  him  the  truth,  and  that 
he  knew  only  one  man  who  was  worthy  to  be  bishop.  He 
died  in  the  arms  of  Ambrose  at  Milan  in  395.  The  bishop 
delivered  his  funeral  oration  in  which  he  tells,  to  his  honor, 
that  on  his  dying  bed  he  was  more  concerned  for  the  condition 
of  the  church  than  for  himself,  and  says  to  the  soldiers :  "  The 
faith  of  Tlieodosius  was  your  victory ;  let  your  truth  and  faith 
be  the  strength  of  his  sons.  Where  unbelief  is,  there  is  blind- 
ness, but  where  fidelity  is,  there  is  the  host  of  angels." 

Two  years  after  this,  Ambrose  himself  was  fatally  sick. 
All  Milan  was  in  terror.  When  he  was  urged  to  pray  God  for 
a  lengthening  of  his  life,  he  answered :  "  I  have  so  lived  among 
you  that  I  cannot  be  ashamed  to  live  longer;  but  neither  do 
I  fear  to  die;  for  we  have  a  good  Lord."  During  his  sickness 
he  had  miraculous  intimations  and  heard  heavenly  voices,  and 
he  himself  related  that  Christ  aj)peared  to  him  smiling.     His 

^  "  Qui  sequutus  es  errantem,  sequere  corrigentem."  Paulinus,  Vita  Ambr. 
c.  24. 

^  Paulinus,  1.  c.  c.  24 :  "  Quod  ubi  audivit  clementissimus  imperator,  ita  susce- 
pit,  ut  publicam  pcenitentiam  non  abhorreret,"  &c.  Ambrose  himself  says  in  his 
funeral  oration  on  Theodosius :  "  Stravit  omne,  quo  utcbatur  insigne  regium,  deflevit 
in  ecclesia  publico  peccatum  suum,  neque  vllus  postea  dies  fuit,  quo  non  ilium  dole- 
ret  errorem."  The  main  fact  is  beyond  doubt ;  but  the  details  are  not  all  reliable, 
and  may  have  been  exaggerated  for  hierarchical  ends. 


§   1Y6.      AMBROSE.  965 

notary  and  biographer,  the  deacon  Paulinus,  who  adorns 
his  life  throughout  with  miraculous  incidents,  tells  us : ' 
"  JSTot  long  before  his  death,  while  he  was  dictating  to  me  his 
exposition  of  the  Forty-third  Psalm,  I  saw  upon  his  head  a 
flame  in  the  form  of  a  small  shield ;  hereupon  his  face  became 
white  as  snow,  and  not  till  some  time  after  did  it  return  to  its 
natural  color."  In  the  night  of  Good  Friday,  on  Saturday, 
the  4th  of  April,  397,  he  died,  at  the  age  of  fifty-seven  years, 
having  first  spent  several  hours,  with  his  hands  crossed,  in 
uninterrupted  prayer.  Even  Jews  and  pagans  lamented  his 
death.  On  the  night  of  Easter  following  many  were  baptized 
in  the  church  where  his  body  was  exposed.  Kot  a  few  of  the 
newly  baptized  children  saw  him  seated  in  the  episcopal  chair 
with  a  shining  star  upon  his  head.  Even  after  his  death  he 
wrought  miracles  in  many  places,  in  proof  of  which  Paulinus 
gives  his  own  experience,  credible  persons,  and  documents. 

Ambrose,  like  Cyprian  before  him,  and  Leo  I.  after  him, 
was  greatest  in  administration.  As  bishop  he  towered  above 
the  contemporary  popes.  As  a  theologian  and  author  he  is 
only  a  star  of  the  second  magnitude  among  the  church 
fathers,  yielding  by  far  to  Jerome  and  Augustine.  We  have 
from  this  distinguished  prelate  several  exegetical,  doctrinal, 
and  ascetic  works,  besides  homilies,  orations,  and  letters.  In 
exegesis  he  adopts  the  allegorical  method  entire,  and  yields 
little  substantial  information.  The  most  important  among  his 
exegetical  works  are  his  homilies  on  the  history  of  creation 
(Hexaemeron,  written  389),  an  Exposition  of  twenty-one  Psalms 
(390-397),  and  a  Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  Luke  (386).' 
The  Commentary  on  the  Pauline  Epistles  (Ambrosiaster  so 
called  or  Pseudo-Ambrosius)  which  found  its  way  among  his 
works,  is  of  uncertain  authorship,  perhaps  the  work  of  the  Ro- 
man deacon  Hilary  under  pope  Damasus,  and  resembles  in 

'  Vjta  Ambr.  c.  42. 

*  The  exegetical  works  are  in  torn.  i.  of  the  Bened.  ed.,  excepting  Ambrosiaster, 
which  is  in  the  Appendix  to  torn.  ii.  Jerome  had  a  contemptuous  opinion  of  his 
exegetical  writings.  In  the  preface  to  his  translation  of  the  thirty-nine  Homilies  of 
Origen  on  Luke,  he  compares  the  superficial  and  meagre  Commentary  of  Ambrose 
on  Luke  to  the  croaking  of  a  raven  which  makes  sport  of  the  colors  of  aU  other 
birds,  and  yet  is  itself  dark  all  over  (totus  ipse  tenebrosus).     Against  this  attack 


966  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

many  respects  the  commentaries  of  Pelagius.  Among  his 
doctrinal  writings  his  five  books  On  Faith,  thi'ee  On  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  six  On  the  Sacraments  (catechetical  sermons  on 
baptism,  confirmation,  and  the  eucharist)  are  worthy  of  men- 
tion. Among  his  ethical  writings  the  work  On  Duties  is  the 
most  important.  It  resembles  in  fonn  the  well-known  work  of 
Cicero  on  the  same  subject,  and  reproduces  it  m  a  Christian 
spirit.  It  is  a  collection  of  rules  of  living  for  the  clergy, 
and  is  the  first  attempt  at  a  Christian  doctrine  of  morals, 
though  without  systematic  method.'  Besides  this  he  com- 
posed several  ascetic  essays :  Three  books  on  Yirgins ;  On  Vir- 
ginity ;  On  the  Institution  of  tlie  Virgin ;  On  Exhortation  to 
Virginity ;  On  the  Fall  of  a  Consecrated  Virgin,  &c.,  which 
contributed  much  to  the  spread  of  celibacy  and  monastic  piety. 
Of  his  ninety-one  Epistles  several  are  of  considerable  historical 
interest. 

In  his  exegesis  and  in  his  theology,  especially  in  the  doc- 
trine of  the  incarnation  and  the  Trinity,  Ambrose  is  entirely 
dependent  on  the  Greek  fathers;  most  on  Basil,  whose 
Hexaemeron  he  almost  slavishly  copied.  In  anthropology  he 
forms  the  transition  from  the  Oriental  doctrine  to  the  system 
of  Augustine,  whose  teacher  and  forerunner  he  was.  He  is 
most  peculiar  in  his  ethics,  which  he  has  set  forth  in  his  three 
books  De  Ofiiciis.  As  a  pulpit  orator  he  possessed  great  dignity, 
force,  and  unction,  and  made  a  deep  impression  on  Augustine, 

Eufinus  felt  it  his  duty  to  defend  Ambrose,  "  qui  non  solum  Mediolancnsis  ecclesise, 
verum  etiam  ommuru  ecclesiarum  columna  quasdam  et  turris  inexpugnabilis  fuit " 
(Invect.  ii.  adv.  Hieron.).  In  his  Catalogus  vir.  illustr.  c.  124,  Jerome  disposes  of 
Ambrose  with  the  following  frosty  and  equivocal  notice :  "  Ambrosius  Mediolancnsis 
episcopus,  usque  in  presentem  diem  scribit,  de  quo,  quia  superest,  meum  judicium 
subtraham,  ne  in  alterutram  partem  aut  adulatio  in  me  reprehendatur,  aut  Veritas." 
In  his  Epistles,  however,  he  occasionally  makes  favorable  allusion  to  his  ascetic 
writings  which  fell  iu  with  his  own  taste.  Augustine,  from  a  sense  of  gratitude  to 
his  spiritual  father,  always  mentions  his  name  with  respect.  The  passages  of  Augus- 
tine on  Ambrose  are  collected  in  the  Selecta  veterum  testimonia  at  the  beginning 
of  the  first  tome  of  the  Bened.  edition.  But  the  xmfavorable  notice  of  Jerome 
quoted  above  is  omitted  there. 

'  De  officiis  ministrorum,  in  three  books  (in  the  Bened.  ed.  tom.  ii.  f.  1-142), 
Comp.  F.  Hasslkr  :  Ueber  das  Verhaltniss  der  heidnischen  und  christlichen  Ethik 
auf  Grand  einer  Yergleichung  des  ciceroniauischen  Buches  JDe  officiis  mit  dem 
gleichnamigen  des  heiligen  Ambrosius,  Miinchcn,  1866. 


§    176.      JEROME   AS    A   DIVINE   AND   SCHOLAR,  967 

to  whose  conversion  lie  contributed  a  considerable  sliare. 
Many  mothers  forbade  their  daughters  to  hear  him  lest  he 
should  induce  them  to  lead  a  life  of  celibacy. 

Ambrose  has  also  a  very  important  place  in  the  history  of 
worship,  and  did  immortal  service  for  the  music  and  poetry  of 
the  church,  as  in  a  former  section  we  have  seen."  Here  again, 
as  in  theology  and  exegesis,  he  brought  over  the  treasures  of 
the  Greek  church  into  the  Latin.  The  church  of  Milan  uses 
to  this  day  a  peculiar  liturgy  which  is  called  after  him  the 
ritus  Airibrosiamis. 


§  176.    Jerome  as  a  Divine  and  Scholar. 

Comp.  tlie  Literature  at  §  41 ;    and  especially  the  excellent  monograpli 

(wliicli-lias  sinee  F^aclie(i"tt8)  of  Prof.  Otto  Zockler:  Hieronymus.        ^ 
Sein  Leben  und  Wirken  aus  seinen  Schriften  dargestellt.     Gotba,  1865.     ^       i  ei- 

Having  already  sketched  the  life  and  character  of  Jerome   Q^^  '^ 
(born  about  340,  died  in  419)  in  connection  with  the  history 
of  monasticism,  we  limit  ourselves  here  to  his  theological  and 
literary  labors,  in  which  he  did  his  chief  service  to  the  church,    .  ■ 

and  has  gained  the  greatest  credit  to  himself. 

Jerome  is  the  most  learned,  the  most  eloquent,  and  the 
most  interesting  author  among  the  Latin  fathers.  He  had  by 
nature  a  burning  thirst  for  knowledge,^  and  continued  miwea- 
riedly  teaching,  and  learning,  and  writing,  to  the  end  of  a  very 
long  life.''  His  was  one  of  those  intellectual  natures,  to  which 
reading  and  study  are  as  indispensable  as  daily  bread.     He 

^  Paulinus,  in  Vita  Ambr.  c.  13,  relates:  "Hoc  in  tempore  primum  antiphonse 
hymni  ac  vigUise  in  ecelesia  Mediolanensi  celebrari  coeperunt.  Cuius  celebritatis 
devotio  usque  in  hodiernum  diem  non  solum  in  eadem  ecelesia,  verum  per  omnes 
pene  occidentis  provincias  manet." 

'^  As  he  himself  says,  Ep.  84,  c.  3  (Opera,  ed.  Vallarsi,  tom.  i.  523) :  "  Dum 
essem  juvenis,  miro  discendi  ferebar  ardore,  nee  justa  quorundam  prresumptionem 
ipse  me  docui." 

^  SuLPicius  Severus,  who  describes  from  his  own  observation  the  learned  seclu- 
sion of  the  aged  Jerome  at  Bethlehem,  where,  however,  he  was  much  interrupted 
and  stimulated  by  the  visits  of  Christians  from  all  parts  of  the  world,  says  of  him,  in 
Dial.  i.  4 :  ''Totus  semper  in  lectione,  totus  in  libris  est;  non  die,  non  nocte  requies- 
cit ;  aut  legit  aliquid  semper,  aut  scribit,"  &c. 


968  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

could  not  live  without  books.  He  accordingly  collected,  by 
great  sacrifices,  a  library  for  that  time  very  considerable  and 
costly,  wbicb  accompanied  him  on  his  journeys.*  He  further 
availed  himself  of  the  oral  instruction  of  great  church  teachers, 
like  Apollinaris  the  Elder  in  Laodicea,  Gregory  JSTazianzen  in 
Constantinople,  and  Didymus  of  Alexandria,  and  was  not 
ashamed  to  become  an  inquiring  pupil  in  his  mature  age.  His 
principle  in  studying  was,  in  his  own  words :  "  To  read  the 
ancients,  to  test  everything,  to  hold  fast  the  good,  and  never 
to  depart  from  the  catholic  faith."  ^ 

Besides  the  passion  for  knowledge,  which  is  the  mother  of 
learning,  he  possessed  a  remarkable  memory,  a  keen  understand- 
ing, quick  and  sound  judgment,  an  ardent  temperament,  a  lively 
imagination,  sparkling  wit,  and  brilliant  power  of  expression. 
He  was  a  master  in  all  the  arts  and  artifices  of  rhetoric  and 
dialectics.  He,  far  more  than  Lactantius,  deserves  the  name 
of  the  Christian  Cicero,  though  he  is  inferior  to  Lactantius  in 
classic  purity,  and  was  not  free  from  the  faulty  taste  of  his 
time.  TertuUian  had,  indeed,  long  before  applied  the  Eoman 
language  as  the  organ  of  Christian  theology ;  Cyprian,  Lactan- 
tius, Hilary,  and  Ambrose,  had  gone  further  on  the  same  jjath ; 
and  Auffustine  has  enriched  the  Christian  literature  with  a 
greater  number  of  pregnant  sentences  than  all  the  other  fathers 
together.  l!«revertheless  Jerome  is  the  chief  former  of  the 
Latin  church  language,  for  which  his  Yulgate  did  a  decisive 
and  standard  service  similar  to  that  of  Luther's  translation  of 
the  Bible  for  German  literature,  and  that  of  the  authorized 
English  Protestant  version  for  English." 

'  He  confesses  that  the  purchase  of  the  numerous  works  of  Origen  had  exhausted 
his  purse,  Ep.  84,  c.  3  (torn.  i.  525) :  "  Legi,  inquam,  Icgi  Origenem,  et,  si  in  legendo 
crimen  est,  fateor ;  et  nostrum  marsupium  Alexandrine  chart®  evacuarunt."  When 
he  saw,  and  was  permitted  to  use,  the  library  of  Pamphilus  in  Caesarea,  with  all  the 
works  of  Origen,  he  thought  he  possessed  more  than  the  riches  of  Croesus  (De  viris 
illustr.  c.  15). 

^  "  Meum  propositum  est,  antiquos  Icgere,  probare  singula,  retinere  qua;  bona 
sunt,  et  a  fide  catholica  numquam  recedere." 

"  OzANAM  (Histoire  de  la  civilisation  chret.  au  5.  siecle,  ii.  100)  calls  Jerome: 
''  Le  maitre  de  la  prose  chrctiennc  pour  tous  les  siecles  suivants."  Zocklek  says 
(1.  c.  p.  323) :  "  As  Cicero  raised  the  language  of  his  time  to  the  classic  grade,  and 
cast  it  for  all  times  in  a  model  form,  so,  of  the  Western  church  fathers,  Jerome  was 


.     §   176.      JEKOME   AS   A   DIVINE   AND   SCHOLAK.  969 

His  scholarship  embraced  the  Latin,  Greek,  and  Hebrew 
languages  and  literature ;  while  even  Augustine  had  but  im- 
perfect knowledge  of  the  Greek,  and  none  at  all  of  the  He- 
brew. Jerome  was  familiar  with  the  Latin  classics,  especially 
with  Cicero,  Virgil,  and  Horace ; '  and  even  after  his  famous 
anti-Ciceronian  vision  (which  transformed  him  from  a  more  or 
less  secular  scholar  into  a  Christian  ascetic  and  hermit)  he 
could  not  entirely  cease  to  read  over  the  favorite  authors  of 
his  youth,  or  at  least  to  quote  them  from  his  faithful  memory ; 
thus  subjecting  himself  to  the  charge  of  inconsistency,  and 
even  of  perjury,  from  Rufinus.^  Equally  accurate  was  his 
knowledge  of  the  literature  of  the  church.  Of  the  Latin 
fathers  he  particularly  admired  Tertullian  for  his  powerful 
genius  and  vigorous  style,  though  he  could  not  forgive  him  his 
Montanism ;  after  him  Cyprian,  Lactantius,  Hilary,  and  Am- 
brose. In  the  Greek  classics  he  was  less  at  home;  yet  he 
shows  acquaintance  with  Hesiod,  Sophocles,  Herodotus, 
Demosthenes,  Aristotle,  Theophrastus,  and  Galen.  But  in  the 
Greek  fathers  he  was  well  read,  especially  in  Origen,  Euse- 
bius,  Didymus,  and  Gregory  Kazianzen ;  less  in  Irengeus, 
Athanasius,  Basil,  and  other  doctrinal  writers. 

the  one  to  make  the  Lathi  language  Christian,  and  Christian  theology  Latin.''"' 
Erasmus  placed  him  as  an  author  in  several  respects  even  above  Cicero. 

'  Virgil  is  quoted  in  the  Letters  of  Jerome  some  fifty  times,  in  his  other  works 
much  more  frequently ;  Horace,  in  the  Letters,  some  twenty  times ;  of  the  prose 
writers  Cicero  more  than  all,  next  to  him  Varro,  Sallust,  Quintihau,  Seneca,  Suetonius, 
and  Phny.  Virgil,  however,  is  viewed  by  Jerome,  and  by  Augustine,  who  hkewise 
admired  him  greatly,  simply  as  a  great  poet,  and  not,  as  he  afterwards  came  to  be 
considered  in  the  Latin  church,  especially  through  the  influence  of  Dante's  Divina 
Commedia,  as  a  divine  and  prophet  of  heathenism. 

"^  Comp.  §  41  above,  and  Zockler,  1.  c.  p.  45  ff.,  156,  and  325.  It  is  certain 
that  Jerome,  after  that  dream  of  about  374,  almost  entirely  suspended  and  even 
abhorred  the  study  of  tlie  classics  for  fifteen  years  (comp.  the  Preface  to  his  Com- 
mentary on  the  Galatians,  written  a.  388,  Opera,  torn.  vii.  486,  ed.  Vallarsi),  but 
that  afterwards  at  Bethlehem  he  instructed  the  monks  in  grammaticis  et  humaniori- 
bus  (Rufinus,  Apol.  ii.  8),  and  inserted  quotations  from  the  classics  in  his  later 
writings,  although  mostly  as  reminiscences  of  his  former  reading  ("  quasi  antiqui  per 
nebulam  somnii  recordamur,"  as  he  says  in  the  preface  above  referred  to),  and  with 
the  obvious  intent  of  making  profane  hterature  subservient  to  the  Bible  (comp.  his 
Epistola  xxi.  ad  Damasum,  cap.  13).  Both  Jerome  and  Rufinus  permitted  them 
selves  to  be  carried  by  passion  to  exaggerated  assertions  at  the  expense  of  truth. 


970  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

The  Hebrew  lie  learned  witli  great  labor  in  liis  mature 
years ;  first  from  a  converted  but  anonymous  Jew,  dm'ing  his 
five  years'  ascetic  seclusion  in  the  Syrian  desert  of  Chalcis 
(374-379);  afterwards  in  Bethlehem  (about  385)  from  the 
Palestinian  Rabbi  Bar-Anina,  who,  throagh  fear  of  the  Jews, 
visited  him  by  night,*  This  exposed  him  to  the  foolish  rumor 
among  bigoted  opponents,  that  he  preferred  Judaism  to  Chris- 
tianity, and  betrayed  Chi'ist  in  preference  to  the  new  "  Barab- 
bas.""  He  afterwards,  in  translating  the  Old  Testament, 
brought  other  Jewish  scholars  to  his  aid,  who  cost  him  dear. 
He  also  inspired  several  of  his  admiring  female  pupils,  like  St. 
Paula  and  her  daughter  Eustochium,  with  enthusiasm  for  the 
study  of  the  sacred  language  of  the  old  covenant,  and  brought 
them  on  so  far  that  they  could  sing  with  him  the  Hebrew 
Psalms  in  praise  of  the  Lord.  He  lamented  the  injurious 
influence  of  these  studies  on  his  style,  since  "the  rattling 
sound  of  the  Hebrew  soiled  all  the  elegance  and  beauty  of 
Latin  speech."  ^  Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  he  was  by  the  same 
means  preserved  from  flying  off  into  hollow  and  turgid  orna- 
mentations, from  which  his  earlier  writings,  such  as  his  letters 
to  Heliodorus  and  Lmocentius,  are  not  altogether  free. 
Though  his  knowledge  of  Hebrew  was  defective,  it  was  much 
greater  than  that  of  Origen,  Epiphanius,  and  Ephraem  Syrus, 
the  only  other  fathers  besides  himself  who  understood  He- 
brew at  all ;  and  it  is  the  more  noticeable,  when  we  consider 
the  want  of  gi-ammatical  and  lexicographical  helps  and  of  the 
Masoretic  punctuation.^ 

'  Ep.  84  ad  Pammach.  et  Ocean,  c.  S  (torn.  i.  524,  ed.  Yallarsi):  "  Veni  rursum 
Jerosolymam  et  Bethlehem.  Quo  labore,  quo  pretio  Baraninam  nocturnum  habui 
prseceptorem !     Tkaebat  enim  Judfeos,  et  mihi  alterum  exhibebat  Nicodemum." 

*  So  Rufinus  crested  the  name,  with  reference  to  Mark  xv.  V.  Comp.  Rufinus, 
Apol.  or  Invect.  ii.  12,  and  the  answer  of  Jerome  to  these  calumnies,  in  the  ApoL 
adv.  libros  Euf.  1.  i.  c.  13  (tom.  ii.  469). 

'  In  the  Preface  to  his  Commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians :  "  Omnem 
sermonis  elegantiam  et  Latini  eloquii  venustatem  stridor  Hebraicse  lectionis  sordi- 
davit."     This,  however,  is  to  be  imderstood  cum  grano  salis. 

*  That  there  were  at  that  time  as  yet  no  vowel-points  or  other  diacritical  signs  in 
writing  Hebrew  words,  has  been  proved  against  Buxtorf  by  L.  Capellus,  Morinus, 
and  Clericus,  and  among  modern  Oriental  scholars,  especially  by  Hupfeld  (Studien 
uiid  Kritikcn,  1830,  p.  549  ff.).     Comp.  ZuCkler,  1.  c.  p.  345  f. 


§   176.       JEROME   AS   A  DmNE   AND   SCHOLAE.  971 

Jerome,  wlio  unfortunately  was  not  free  from  vanity, 
prided  himself  not  a  little  upon  his  learning,  and  boasted 
against  his  opponent  Rufinus,  that  he  was  "  a  philosopher,  a 
rhetorician,  a  grammarian,  a  dialectician,  a  Hebre^\',  a  Greek, 
a  Latin,  three-tongued,"  that  is,  master  of  the  three  principal 
languages  of  the  then  civilized  world.' 

All  these  manifold  and  rare  gifts  and  attainments  made 
him  an  extremely  influential  and  useful  teacher  of  the  church ; 
for  he  brought  them  all  into  the  service  of  an  earnest  and  ener- 
getic, though  monkishly  eccentric  piety.  They  gave  him 
superior  access  to  the  sense  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  which  con- 
tinued to  be  his  daily  study  to  extreme  old  age,  and  stood  far 
hio^her  in  his  esteem  than  all  the  classics.  His  wiitino;s  are  im- 
bued  with  Bible  knowledge,  and  strewn  with  Bible  quotations. 

But  with  all  this  he  was  not  free  from  faults  as  glaring  as 
his  virtues  are  shining,  which  disturb  our  due  esteem  and 
admiration.  He  lacked  depth  of  mind  and  character,  delicate 
sense  of  truth,  and  firm,  strong  convictions.  He  allowed  him- 
self inconsistencies  of  every  kind,  especially  in  his  treatment 
of  Origen,  and,  through  solicitude  for  his  own  reputation  for 
orthodoxy,  he  was  unjust  to  that  great  teacher,  to  whom  he 
owed  so  much.  He  was  very  impulsive  in  temperament,  and 
too  much  followed  momentary,  changing  impressions.  Many 
of  his  works  were  thrown  off  with  great  haste  and  little  con- 
sideration. He  was  by  nature  an  extremely  vain,  ambitious, 
and  passionate  man,  and  he  never  succeeded  in  fully  overcom- 
ing these  evil  forces.  He  could  not  bear  censure.  Even  his 
later  polemic  writings  are  full  of  envy,  hatred,  and  anger.     In 

'  ApoL  adv.  Ruf.  lib.  iii.  c.  6  (torn.  ii.  537).  His  claim  to  be  a  philosopher  may 
be  questioned.  In  the  same  place  he  calls  "  papa "  Epiphanius  TTiVTayKurros,  a 
man  of  five  tongues,  because  besides  the  three  chief  languages  he  also  understood 
the  Sjriac  and  the  Egyptian  or  Coptic.  But  his  knowledge  of  the  languages  was 
far  inferior  to  that  of  Jerome.  Augustine  regarded  Jerome  as  the  most  learned  man 
among  all  mortals.  "Quod  Hieronymus  nescivit,"  he  said,  "nullus  mortalium 
unquam  scivit."  Comp.  also  the  enthusiastic  praise  of  Erasmus,  quoted  §  41,  p. 
206,  who  placed  him  far  above  all  the  fathers;  while  Luther  acknowledged  his 
learning  indeed,  but  could  not  bear  his  monastic  spirit,  and  judged  him  harshly  and 
unjustly.  Comp.  M.  Lutheri  Colloquia,  ed.  H.  Bindseil,  1863,  tom.  iii.  135,  1-19, 
193 ;  ii.  340,  349,  357. 


972  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

his  correspondence  with  Augustine,  with  all  assurances  of 
respect,  he  everywhere  gives  that  father  to  feel  his  own  supe- 
riority as  a  comprehensive  scholar,  and  in  one  place  tells  him 
that  he  never  had  taken  the  trouble  to  read  his  writings, 
excepting  his  Soliloquies  and  "  some  commentaries  on  the 
Psalms."  He  indulged  in  rhetorical  exaggerations  and  unjust 
inferences,  which  violated  the  laws  of  truth  and  honesty  ;  and 
he  supported  himself  in  this,  with  a  characteristic  reference  to 
the  sophist  Gorgias,  by  the  equivocal  distinction  between  the 
gymnastic  or  polemic  style  and  the  didactic'  From  his 
master  Cicero  he  had  also  learned  the  vicious  rhetorical  arts 
of  bombast,  declamatory  fiction,  and  applause-seeking  effects, 
which  are  unworthy  of  a  Christian  theologian,  and  which  in- 
vite the  reproach  of  the  divine  judge  in  that  vision :  "  Thou 
liest !  thou  art  a  Ciceronian,  not  a  Christian ;  for  where  thy 
treasure  is,  there  thy  heart  is  also." 


§  177.     The  Works  of  Jerome. 

The  writings  of  Jerome,  which  fill  eleven  folios  in  the  edi- 
tion of  Vallarsi,  may  be  divided  into  exegetical,  historical, 
polemic  doctrinal,  and  polemic  ethical  works,  and  epistles.^ 

I.  The  EXEGETICAL  works  stand  at  the  head. 

Among  these  the  Yulgata,"  or  Latin  version  of  the  whole 

'  Between  -yvixvavT  11101%  scribere  and  So7/^aTiKiSs  scribere.  Ep.  48  ad  Pamma- 
chium  pro  libris  contra  Jovinianum,  cap.  13. 

'  The  Vallarsi  edition,  Verona,  1734-'42,  and  with  improvements,  Venet.  1766- 
'72,  is  much  more  complete  and  accurate  than  the  Benedictine  or  Maurine  edition 
of  Martianay  and  Pouget,  in  5  Tols.  1706,  although  this  far  surpassed  the  older 
editions  of  Erasmus,  and  Marianus  Victorius.  The  edition  of  Migne,  Paris  (Petit- 
Montrouge),  1845-46,  also  in  11  volumes  (torn,  xxii.-xxx.  of  the  Patrologia  Lat.), 
notwithstanding  the  boastful  title,  is  only  an  uncritical  reprint  of  the  edition  of  Val- 
larsi with  unessential  changes  in  the  order  of  arrangement ;  the  Vitse  Hieronyml  and 
the  Testimonia  de  Hieronymo  being  transferred  from  the  eleventh  to  the  first  volume, 
which  is  more  convenient.  Vallarsi,  a  presbyter  of  Verona,  was  assisted  in  his 
work  by  Scipio  Maffci,  and  others.  I  have  mostly  used  his  edition,  especially  in  the 
Epistles.  I 

'  The  name  Vulgata,  sc.  editio,  Koivi]  eK5offis,i.  e.,  the  received  text  of  the 
Bible,  was  a  customary  designation  of  the  Septuagint,  as  also  of  the  Latin  Itala 
(Frequently  so  used  in  Jerome  and  Augustine),  sometimes  used  in  the  bad  sense  of 


^...N'^ 


§   177.       THE   WORKS   OF   JEROME.  973 

Bible,  Old  Testament  and  Kew,  is  by  far  tbe  most  important 
and  valuable,  and  constitutes  alone  an  immortal  service." 

a  vulgar,  corrupt  text  as  distinct  from  tlie  original.  The  council  of  Trent  sanc- 
tioned the/use  of  the  term  in  the  honorable  sense  for  Jerome's  version  of  the  Bible. 
With  the4ame  right  Luther's  version  might  be  called  the  German,  King  James' 
version  ^e  English  Vulgate. /^-^^^ 

^  This  is  now  pretty  generally  acknowledged.  We  add  a  few  of  the  most 
weighty  testimonies.  Lutder,  who  bore  a  real  aversion  to  Jerome  on  account  of 
bis  fanatical  devotion  to  monkery,  still,  in  view  of  the  invaluable  assistance  he 
received  from  the  Vulgate  in  his  own  similar  work,  does  him  the  justice  to  say : 
"  St.  Jerome  has  personally  done  more  and  greater  in  translation  than  any  one  man 
wiU  imitate."  Zockler,  1.  c.  p.  183,  thinks:  "The  Vulgate  is  unquestionably  the 
most  important  and  most  meritorious  achievement  of  our  author,  the  ripest  fruit  of 
his  laborious  studies,  not  only  in  the  department  of  Hebrew,  in  which  he  leaves  all 
other  ecclesiastical  authors  of  antiquity  far  behind,  but  also  in  that  of  Greek  and  of 
biblical  criticism  and  exegesis  in  general,  in  which  he  excels  at  least  all,  even  the 
greatest,  of  the  Western  fathers."  0.  F.  Fritzsche  (in  Herzog's  Encykl.  vol.  xvii. 
p.  435) :  "  The  severe  judgment  respecting  the  labor  of  Jerome  softened  with  time, 
and,  in  fact,  so  swung  to  the  opposite,  that  he  was  regarded  as  preserved  from  error 
by  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  This  certainly  caimot  be  admitted,  for  the 
defects  are  palpably  many  and  various.  Yet  criticism  must  acknowledge  that 
Jerome  performed  a  truly  important  service  for  his  age ;  that  he  first  gave  the  Old 
Testament  to  the  West,  and  in  a  measure  also  the  New,  in  a  substantially  pure 
form ;  put  a  stop,  provisionally,  to  the  confusion  of  the  Bible  text ;  and  as  a  trans- 
lator gave,  on  the  whole,  the  true  sense.  He  very  properly  aimed  to  be  interpres, 
not  paraphrastes,  but  in  the  great  dissimilarity  between  the  Hebrew  and  Latin  idiom, 
he  encountered  the  danger  of  slavish  Uteralness.  This  he  has  in  general  avoided, 
and  has  been  able  to  keep  a  certain  mean  between  too  great  strictness  and  too  great 
freedom,  so  that  the  language,  though  everywhere  showing  the  Hebrew  tinge,  would 
not  at  all  offend,  but  rather  favor,  the  reader  of  thai  day.  Yet  it  may  be  said  that 
Jerome  could  have  done  still  better.  It  was  not  that  reverence,  caution,  restrained 
him ;  to  avoid  offence,  he  adhered  as  closely  as  possible  to  the  current  version, 
especially  in  the  New  Testament.  He  sometimes  let  false  translations  stand,  when 
they  seemed  harmless  ("quod  non  nocebat,  mutare  noluimus "),  and  probably  fol- 
lowed popular  usage  in  respect  to  phraseology ;  so  that  the  style  is  not  perfectly 
uniform.  Finally,  he  did  not  always  give  himself  due  time,  but  worked  rapidly. 
This  is  particularly  true  in  the  Apocrypha,  of  which,  however,  he  had  a  very  low 
estimate.  Some  parts  he  left  entirely  untouched,  others  he  translated  or  revised 
very  hastily."  Comp.  also  the  opinion  of  the  English  scholar,  B.  F.  Westcott,  in 
W.  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  vol.  iii.  pp.  1696  and  1*714  f.,  who  says  among 
other  things :  "  When  every  allowance  has  been  made  for  the  rudeness  of  the 
original  Latin,  and  the  haste  of  Jerome's  revision,  it  can  scarcely  be  denied  that 
the  Vulgate  is  not  only  the  most  venerable  but  also  the  most  precious  monument  of 
Latin  Christianity.  For  ten  centuries  it  preserved  in  Western  Europe  a  text  of 
Holy  Scripture  far  purer  than  that  which  was  current  in  the  Byzantine  church ;  and 
at  the  revival  of  Greek  learning,  guided  the  way  towards  a  revision  of  the  late 


974:  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Above  all  his  contemporaries,  and  above  all  bis  successors 
down  to  the  sixteenth  century,  Jerome,  by  his  linguistic 
knowledge,  his  Oriental  travel,  and  his  entire  cultm'e,  was  best 
fitted,  and,  in  fact,  the  only  man,  to  undertake  and  successfully 
execute  so  gigantic  a  task,  and  a  task  which  just  then,  with 
the  approaching  separation  of  East  and  "West,  and  the  decay 
of  the  knowledge  of  the  original  languages  of  the  Bible  in 
Latin  Christendom,  was  of  the  highest  necessity.  Here,  as  so 
often  in  history,  we  plainly  discern  the  hand  of  divine  Provi- 
dence. Jerome  began  the  work  during  his  second  residence 
in  Rome  (382-385),  at  the  suggestion  of  poj^e  Damasus,  who 
deserves  much  more  credit  for  that  suggestion  than  for  his 
hymns.  He  at  first  intended  only  a  revision  of  the  Itala,  the 
old  Latin  version  of  the  Bible  which  came  down  from  the 
second  century,  and  the  text  of  which  had  fallen  into  inextrica- 
ble confusion  through  the  negligence  of  transcribers  and  the 
caprice  of  correctors.'  He  finished  the  translation  at  Bethle- 
hem, in  the  year  405,  after  twenty  years  of  toil.  He  translated 
first  the  Gospels,  then  the  rest  of  the  Kew  Testament,  next  the 
Psalter  (which  he  wrought  over  twice,  in  Rome  and  in  Bethle- 
hem ''),  and  then,  in  irregular  succession,  the  historical,  prophe- 
tic, and  poetical  books,  and  in  part  the  Apocrypha,  which, 
however,  he  placed  decidedly  below  the  canonical  books.  By 
this  "  labor  pius,  sed  periculosa  prsesumtio,"  as  he  called  it,  he 
subjected  himself  to  all  kinds  of  enmity  from  ignorance  and 
blind  aversion  to  change,  and  was  abused  as  a  disturber  of  the 
peace  and  falsifier  of  the  Scripture ; '  but  from  other  sources 
he  received  much  encouragement.     The  New  Testament  and 

Greek  text,  in  which  the  best  biblical  critics  have  followed  the  steps  of  Bentley, 
with  ever-deepening  conviction  of  the  supreme  importance  of  the  coincidence  of  the 
earliest  Greek  and  Latin  anthonties" /^^^^^^ 

'  Jerome  says  of  the  Itala :  "  Tot  sunt  exemplaria  pasne  quot  codices,"  and  fre- 
quently complains  of  the  "varietas"  and  "vitiositas"  of  the  Codices  Latini,  which 
he  charges  partly  upon  the  original  translators,  partjy  upon  presumptuous  revisers, 
partly  upon  negligent  transcribers.  Comp.  especially  his  Praefat.  in  Evang.  ad 
Damasum. 

^  Both  versions  continued  in  use,  the  former  as  the  Psalterium  Romanum,  the 
other  as  the  Pmlterium  Galllcanum,  like  the  two  English  versions  of  the  Psalms 
in  the  worsliip  of  the  Anglican  church. 

'  Falsarius,  sacrilegus,  et  corruptor  Scripturae. 


,,^  ^^  ^3^:^.^-^ 


,_;^  .r^.^'^^^^,    ^-  ^^—y  ^ 


§   177.      THE   WOEKS   OF   JEROME.  975 

the  Psalter  were  circulated  and  used  in  the  church  long  before 
the  completion  of  the  whole.  Augustine,  for  example,  was 
using  the  Kew  Testament  of  Jerome,  and  urged  him  strongly 
to  translate  the^  Old  Testament,  but  to  translate  it  from  the 
Sej)tuagint.'  Gradually  the  whole  version  made  its  way  on  its 
own  merits,  without  authoritative  enforcement,  and  was  used 
in  the  West,  at  first  together  with  the  Itala,  and  after  about 
the  ninth  centmy  alone. 

The  Yulgate  takes  the  first  place  among  the  Bible-versions 
of  the  ancient  church.  It  exerted  the  same  influence  upon 
Latin  Christendom  as  the  Septuagint  upon  Greek,  and  it  is 
directly  or  indirectly  the  mother  of  most  of  the  earher  ver- 
sions in  the  European  vernaculars."  It  is  made  immediately 
from  the  original  languages,  though  with  the  use  of  all  acces- 
sible helps,  and  is  as  much  superior  to  the  Itala  as  Luther's 
Bible  to  the  older  German  versions.  From  the  present  stage 
of  biblical  philology  and  exegesis  the  Yulgate  can  be  charged, 
indeed,  with  innumerable  faults,  inaccuracies,  inconsistencies, 
and  arbitrary  dealing,  in  particulars;'  but  notwithstanding 
these,  it  deserves,  as  a  whole,  the  highest  praise  for  the  bold- 
ness with  which  it  went  back  from  the  half-deified  Septuagint 
directly  to  the  original  Hebrew ;  for  its  imion  of  fidehty  and 
freedom ;  and  for  the  dignity,  clearness,  and  gracefulness  of  its 
style.  Accordingly,  after  the  extinction  of  the  knowledge  of 
Greek,  it  very  naturally  became  the  clerical  Bible  of  Western 
Christendom,  and  so  continued  to  be,  till  the  genius  of  the 
Kefonnation  in  Germany,  Switzerland,  Holland,  and  England, 
returning  to  the  original  text,  and  still  further  penetrating  the 

^  Augustine  feared,  from  the  displacement  of  the  Septuagint,  which  he  regarded 
as  apostolically  sanctioned,  and  as  inspired,  a  division  between  the  Greek  and  Latin 
church,  but  yielded  afterwards,  in  part  at  least,  to  the  correct  view  of  Jerome, 
and  rectified  in  his  Retractations  several  false  translations  in  his  former  works. 
Westcott,  in  his  scholarly  article  on  the  Vxilgate  (in  Smith's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible, 
iii.  702),  makes  the  remark :  "  There  are  few  more  touching  instances  of  humility 
than  that  of  the  young  Augustine  bending  himself  in  entire  submission  before  the 
contemptuous  and  impatient  reproof  of  the  veteran  scholar." 

^  Excepting  the  Gothic  version,  which  is  older  than  Jerome,  and  the  Slavonic, 
which  comes  down  from  Methodius  and  Cyril. 

^  It  has  been  so  censured  long  ago  by  Le  Clerc  in  his  Qusestiones  Hieronymianse, 


976  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

spirit  of  tlie  Scriptui'es,  tliougli  with  the  continual  help  of  the 
Yulgate,  produced  a  number  of  popular  Bibles,  which  were 
the  same  to  the  evangelical  laitj  that  the  Yulgate  had  been 
for  many  centuries  to  the  catholic  clergy.  This  high  place  the 
Yulgate  holds  even  to  this  day  in  the  Roman  church,  where 
it  is  unwarrantably  and  perniciously  placed  on  an  equality 
with  the  original.' 

The  Commentaries  of  Jerome  cover  Genesis,  the  Major  and 
Minor  Prophets,  Ecclesiastes,  Job,  some  of  the  Psalms,^  the 
Gospel  of  Matthew,  and  the  Epistles  to  the  Galatians,  Ephe- 
sians,  Titus,  and  Philemon.'     Besides  these  he  translated  the 

^  For  particulars  respecting  the  Vulgate,  see  H.  Hodt  :  De  Bibliorum  textibus 
originalibus,  Oxon.  1705;  Joh,  Clericus:  Quasstiones  HieronymianiB,  Amsterd. 
1719  (who,  provoked  by  the  exaggerated  praise  of  the  Benedictine  editor,  Martianay, 
subjected  the  Vulgate  to  a  sharp  and  penetrating,  though  in  part  unjust  criticism) ; 
Leander  van  Ess:  Pragmatisch-kritische  Geschichte  der  Vulgata,  Tiib.  1824;  the 
lengthy  article  Vulgata  by  0.  F.  Fkitzsche  in  Herzog's  Theol.  Encycl.  vol.  xvii.  pp. 
422-460 ;  an  article  on  the  same  subject  by  B.  F.  Westcott  in  W.  Smith's  Dic- 
tionary of  the  Bible,  1863,  vol.  iii.  pp.  688-718;  iJpid  Zockler:  Hieronymus,  pp.  99 
ff. ;  183  ff.;  343  ff.^ 

The  text  of  the  Vulgate,  in  the  course  of  time,  has  become  as  corrupt  as  the  text 
of  the  Itala  was  at  the  time  of  Jerome,  and  it  is  as  much  in  need  of  a  critical  revi- 
sion from  manuscript  sources,  as  the  textus  receptus  of  the  Greek  Testament.  The 
authorized  editions '  of  Sixtus  V.  and  Clement  XIII.  have  not  accomplished  this 
task.  Martianay,  in  the  Benedictine  edition  of  Jerome's  work,  did  more  valuable 
service  towards  an  approximate  restoration  of  the  Vulgate  in  its  original  form  from 
manuscript  sources.  Of  late  the  learned  Barnabite  C.  Vercellone  has  commenced 
such  a  critical  revision  in  Variae  Lectiones  Vulgatae  Latin.  BibUorum  editiouis,  tom. 
i.  (Pentat.),  Rome,  1860 ;  tom.  ii.  Pars  prior  (to  1  Ecgg.),  1862.  Westcott,  in  the 
article  referred  to,  has  made  use  of  the  chief  results  of  this  work,  which  may  be  said 
to  create  an  epoch  in  the  history  of  the  Vulgate. 

^  His  seven  treatises  on  Psalms  x.-xvi.  (probably  translated  from  Origen),  and 
his  brief  annotations  to  all  the  Psalms  (commentarioli)  are  lost,  but  the  pseudo. 
hieronymianum  breviarium  in  Psalmos,  a  poor  compilation  of  later  times  (Opera,  vii. 
1-588),  contains  perhaps  fragments  of  these. 

^  Opera,  tom.  iii.  iv.  v.  vi.  and  vii.  Jerome  dedicated  his  commentaries  and 
other  writings  mostly  to  those  high-born  ladies  of  Rome  whom  he  induced  to 
embrace  the  ascetic  mode  of  life,  as  Paula,  Eustochium,  Marcella,  &c.  He  received 
much  encouragement  from  them  in  his  labors ; — such  was  the  lively  theological  inter- 
est which  prevailed  in  some  female  circles  at  the  time.  He  was,  however,  cen- 
sured on  this  account,  and  defended  himself  in  the  Preface  to  his  Commentary  on 
Zephaniah,  tom.  vi.  671,  by  referring  to  Deborah  and  Huldah,  Judith  and  Esther, 
Anna,  Ehzabeth,  and  Mary,  not  forgetting  the  heathen  Sappho,  Aspasia,  Themista, 
and  the  Cornelia  Gracchorum,  as  examples  of  literary  women. 


§  177.      THE   WOKKS    OF   JEKOilE.  977 

Homilies  of  Origen  on  Jeremiali  and  Ezekiel,  on  tlie  Gospel 
of  Luke,  and  on  the  Song  of  Solomon.  Of  the  last  he  says : 
"  "While  Origen  in  his  other  writings  has  surpassed  all  others, 
on  the  Song  of  Solomon  he  has  surpassed  himself."  ' 

His  best  exegetical  labors  are  those  on  the  Prophets  (par- 
ticularly his  Isaiah,  written  A.  d.  408-410 ;  his  Ezekiel, 
A.  D.  410-415 ;  and  his  Jeremiah  to  chap,  xxxii.,  interrupted 
by  his  death),  and  those  on  the  Epistles  to  the  Galatians, 
Ephesians,  and  Titus  (written  in  388),  together  with  his  critical 
Questions  (or  investigations)  on  Genesis,  But  they  are  not 
uniformly  carried  out ;  many  parts  are  very  indifferent,  others 
thrown  off  with  unconscionable  carelessness  in  reliance  on  his 
genius  and  his  reading,  or  dictated  to  an  amanuensis  as  they 
came  into  his  head."^  He  not  seldom  surprises  by  clear,  nat- 
ural, and  conclusive  expositions,  while  just  on  the  difficult 
passages  he  wavers,  or  confines  himself  to  adducing  Jewish 
traditions  and  the  exegetical  opinions  of  the  earlier  fathers, 
especially  of  Origen,  Eusebius,  Apolliuaris,  and  Didymus, 
leaving  the  reader  to  judge  and  to  choose.  His  scholarly  in- 
dustry, taste,  and  skill,  however,  always  afford  a  certain  com- 
pensation for  the  defect  of  method  and  consistency,  so  that  his 
commentaries  are,  after  all,  the  most  instructive  we  have  fi-om 
the  Latin  church  of  that  day,  not  excepting  even  those  of 
Augustine,  which  otherwise  greatly  surpass  them  in  theological 
depth  and  spiritual  unction.  He  justly  observes  in  the  Preface 
to  his  Commentary  on  Isaiah :  "  He  who  does  not  know  the 
Scriptures,  does  not  know  the  power  and  wisdom  of  God; 
ignorance  of  the  Bible  is  ignorance  of  Christ."  ^ 

'  Praef.  in  Homil.  Orig.  in  Cantic.  Cant.  torn.  iii.  500.  Rufinus,  during  the 
Origenistic  controversy,  did  not  forget  to  remind  him  of  this  sentence. 

"  He  frequently  excuses  this  "  dictare  quodcunque  in  buccam  venerit,"  by  his 
want  of  time  and  the  weakness  of  his  eyes.  Comp.  Preface  to  the  ttiird  book  of  his 
Comment,  in  Ep.  ad  Galat.  (torn.  vii.  486).  At  the  close  of  the  brief  Preface  to  the 
second  book  of  his  Commentary  on  the  Ep.  to  the  Ephesians  (torn.  vii.  586),  he  says 
that  he  often  managed  to  write  as  many  as  a  thousand  lines  in  one  day  ("  interdum 
per  singulos  dies  usque  ad  numerum  mille  versuum — L  e.,  here  o-tIxoi — perve- 
nire"). 

*  "Qui  nescit  Scripturas,  nescit  Dei  virtutem  ejusque  sapientiam;    ignoratio 
Scripturarum  ignoratio  Christi  est." 
VOL.  II.— 62 


978  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Jerome  had  the  natural  talent  and  the  acquired  knowledge, 
to  make  him  the  father  of  grammatico-historical  interpretation, 
upon  which  all  sound  study  of  the  Scriptures  must  proceed. 
He  verj  rightly  felt  that  the  expositor  must  not  put  his  own 
fancies  into  the  word  of  God,  but  draw  out  the  meaning  of  that 
word,  and  he  sometimes  finds  fault  with  Origen  and  the  alle- 
gorical method  for  roaming  in  the  wide  fields  of  imagination, 
and  giving  out  the  writer's  own  thought  and  fancy  for  the 
hidden  wisdom  of  the  Scriptm-es  and  the  church.*  In  this 
healthful  exegetical  spirit  he  excelled  all  the  fathers,  except 
Chrysostom  and  Theodoret.  In  the  Latin  church  no  others, 
except  the  heretical  Pelagius  (whose  short  exposition  of  the 
Epistles  of  Paul  is  incorporated  in  the  works  of  Jerome),  and 
the  unknown  Ambrosiaster  (whose  commentary  has  found  its 
way  among  the  works  of  Ambrose),  thought  like  him.  But 
he  was  far  from  being  consistent ;  he  committed  the  very  fault 
he  censures  in  Eusebius,  who  in  the  superscription  of  his  Com- 
mentary on  Isaiah  promised  a  historical  exposition,  but,  for- 
getting the  promise,  fell  into  the  fashion  of  Origen.  Though 
he  often  makes  very  bold  utterances,  such  as  that  on  the  orig- 
inal identity  of  presbyter  and  bishop,'^  and  even  shows  traces 
of  a  loose  view  of  inspiration,^  yet  he  had  not  the  courage,  and 
was  too  scrupulously  concerned  for  his  orthodoxy,  to  break 
with  the  traditional  exegesis.  He  could  not  resist  the  impulse 
to  indulge,  after  giving  the  historical  sense,  in  fantastic  alle- 
§oi-izing,  or,  as  he  expresses  himself,  "  to  spread  the  sails  of 
the  spiritual  understanding."  * 

'  Comp.  particularly  the  Preface  to  the  fifth  book  of  his  Commentary  on  Isaiah, 
and  Ep.  53  ad  Paulinum,  c.  7. 

"  In  the  Comm.  on  Tit.  i.  5,  and  elsewhere,  e.  g.,  Epist.  69  ad  Oceanum,  c.  3, 
and  Epist.  146  ad  Erangelum,  c.  1.  Such  assertions,  which  we  find  also  in  Ambro- 
siaster, Chrysostom,  and  Theodoret,  were  not  disputed  at  that  time,  but  subse- 
quently they  gave  rise  to  -violent  disputes  betweerf  Episcopalians  and  Presbyterians. 
Comp.  my  History  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  §  132,  p.  524  f. 

'  He  admits,  for  instance,  chronological  contradictions,  or,  at  least,  inexplicable 
difficulties  in  the  Gospel  history  (Ep.  57  ad  Pammach.  c.  7  and  8),  and  he  even  ven- 
tures unjustly  to  censure  St.  Paul  for  supposed  solecisms,  barbarisms,  and  weak 
arguments  (Ep.  121  ad  Alag. ;  Comment,  in  Gal.  jii.  1 ;  iv.  24;  vi.  2 ;  Comment,  in 
Eph.  iii.  3,  8,  13 ;  Comment,  m  Tit.  i.  3). 

*  ''  Spiritualis  intelligentiae  vela  pandere,"  or  "  spirituale  sedificium  super  historic 


§    177.      THE   W0EK8   OF   JEROME.  979 

He  distinguishes  in  most  cases  a  double  sense  of  the  Scrip- 
tures :  the  literal  and  the  spiritual,  or  the  historical  and  the 
allegorical ;  sometimes,  with  Origen  and  the  Alexandrians,  a 
triple  sense :  the  historical,  the  tropological  (moral),  and  the 
pneumatical  (mystical). 

The  word  of  God  does  unquestionably  carry  in  its  letter  a 
living  and  life-giving  spirit,  and  is  capable  of  endless  applica- 
tion to  all  times  and  circumstances ;  and  here  lies  the  truth  in 
the  allegorical  method  of  the  ancient  church.  But  the  spirit- 
ual sense  must  be  derived  with  tender  conscientiousness  and 
self-command  from  the  natural,  literal  meaning,  not  brought 
from  without,  as  another  sense  beside,  or  above,  or  against 
the  literal. 

Jerome  goes  sometimes  as  far  as  Origen  in  the  unscrupulous 
twisting  of  the  letter  and  the  history,  and  adopts  his  mischievous 
principle  of  entirely  rejecting  tlie  literal  sense  whenever  it  may 
seem  ludicrous  or  unworthy.  For  instance :  By  the  Shunamite 
damsel,  the  concubine  of  the  aged  king  David,  he  understands 
(imitating  Origen's  allegorical  obliteration  of  the  double  crime 
against  Uriah  and  Bathsheba)  the  ever-virgin  TVisdom  of 
God,  so  extolled  by  Solomon ; '  and  the  earnest  controversy 
between  Paul  and  Peter  he  alters  into  a  sham  fight  for  the 
instruction  of  the  Antiochian  Christians  who  were  present ; 
thus  making  out  of  it  a  deceitful  accommodation,  over  which 
Augustine  (who  took  just  offence  at  such  ^atrocinium  nnen- 
dacii)  drew  him  into  an  epistolary  controversy  characteristic 
of  the  two  men." 

fundamentum  extraere,"  or  "quasi  inter  saxa  et  scopulos"  (between  Scylla  and  Cha- 
rybdis),  "  sic  inter  liistoriam  et  allegoriam  orationis  cursum  flectere." 

'  Ep.  52  ad  Xepotianum,  c.  2-4.  He  objects  against  the  historical  construction, 
that  it  is  absurd,  inasmuch  as  the  aged  David,  then  seventy  years  old,  might  as  well 
have  warmed  himself  in  the  arms  of  Bathsheba,  Abigail,  and  the  other  wives  and 
concubines  still  living,  considering  that  Abraham  at  a  still  more  advanced  age  was 
content  with  his  Sarah,  Isaac  with  his  Rebeccah.  The  Shunamite,  therefore,  must 
be  "sapientia  quaj  numquam  senescit"  (c.  4,  torn.  i.  258).  Nevertheless,  in  another 
place,  he  understands  the  same  passage  literally.  Contra  Jovinian.  1.  i.  c.  24  (tom.  i. 
274),  where  he  mentions  this  and  other  sins  of  David,  "  non  quod  Sanctis  viris  aliquid 
detrahere  audeam,  sed  quod  aliud  sit  in  lege  versari,  aliud  in  evangeUo." 

'  Comp.  Jerome's  Com.  on  Gal.  ii.  11-14;  Aug.  Epp.  26,  40,  and  82,  or  Epp. 
56,  67,  and  116  among  the  Epistles  of  Jerome  (Opera,  i.  300  sqq. ;  404  sqq. ;  761  sqq.). 


980  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

It  is  remarkable  that  Aiignstine  and  Jerome,  in  the  two 
exegetical  questions,  on  which  they  corresponded,  interchanged 
sides,  and  each  took  the  other's  point  of  view.  In  the  dispute 
on  the  occurrence  in  Antioch  (Gal.  ii.  11-14),  Augustine  repre- 
sented the  principle  of  evangelical  freedom  and  love  of  truth, 
Jerome  the  principle  of  traditional  committal  to  dogma  and 
an  equivocal  theory  of  accommodation ;  while  in  their  dispute 
on  the  authority  of  the  Septuagint  Jerome  held  to  true  prog- 
ress, Augustine  to  retrogression  and  false  traditionalism.  And 
each  afterwards  saw  his  error,  and  at  least  partially  gave  it 
up. 

In  the  exposition  of  the  Prophets,  Jerome  sees  too  many 
allusions  to  the  heretics  of  his  time  (as  Luther  finds  every- 
where allusions  to  the  Papists,  fanatics,  and  sectarians) ;  and, 
on  the  other  hand,  with  the  zeal  he  inherited  from  Origen 
against  all  chiliasm,  he  finds  far  too  little  reference  to  the  end 
of  all  things  in  the  second  coming  of  our  Lord.  He  limits,  for 
example,  even  the  eschatological  discourse  of  Christ  in  the 
twenty-fourth  chapter  of  Matthew,  and  Paul's  prophecy  of  the 
man  of  sin  in  the  second  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

Among  the  exegetical  works  in  the  wider  sense  belongs 
the  book  On  the  Interpretation  of  the  Hebrew  Names,  an 
etymological  lexicon  of  the  proper  names  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  useful  for  its  time,  but  in  many  respects  defective, 
and  now  worthless ;  ^  and  a  free  translation  of  the  Onomasticon 
of  Eusebius,  a  sort  of  biblical  topology  in  alphabetical  order, 
still  valuable  to  antiquarian  scholarship.'* 

After  defending  for  a  loug  time  his  false  interpretation,  Jerome  gave  it  up  at  last, 
A.  D.  415,  in  his  Dial,  contra  Pelag.  1.  i.  c.  22.  Augustine,  on  the  other  hand,  yielded 
his  erroneous  preference  for  a  translation  of  the  Old  Testament  fnom  the  Septuagint 
instead  of  the  original  Hebrew,  although  he  continued  to  entertain  an  exaggerated 
estimate  of  the  value  of  the  Septuagint  and  the  very  imperfect  Itala.  Besides  these 
two  points  of  dispute  the  Origenistic  errors  were  a  subject  of  correspondence  between 
these  most  distinguished  fathers  of  the  Latin  Church. 

'  Liber  de  inierpretatione  nominum  Hebraicorum,  or  De  nominibus  Hebr.  (Opera, 
torn.  iii.  1-120).  Clericus,  in  his  Qusestiones  Hieronymiana?,  severely  criticised 
this  book. 

^  Liber  de  situ  et  nominibus  locorum  Hebraicorum,  usually  cited  under  the  title 
Eusebii  Onomasticon  (urbium  et  locorum  S.  Scripturee).     Opera,  torn.  iii.  121-290. 


§   177.      THE   WORKS   OF   JEKOME.  981 

II.  The  HiSTOKiCAL  works,  some  of  whicli  we  liave  already 
elsewhere  touched,  are  important  to  the  history  of  the  fathers 
and  the  saints,  to  Christian  literature,  and  to  the  history  of 
morals. 

•Fhst  among  them  is  a  free  Latin  reproduction  and  contin- 
uation of  the  Greek  Chronicle  of  Eusebius;  i.  e.,  chronological 
tables  of  the  most  important  events  of  the  history  of  the  world 
and  the  church  to  the  year  379/  Jerome  dictated  this  work 
quite  fugitively  during  his  residence  with  Gregory  Kazianzen 
in  Constantinoj^le  (a.  d.  380).  In  spite  of  its  many  errors,  it 
formed  a  very  useful  and  meritorious  contribution  to  Latin 
literature,  and  a  principal  source  of  the  scanty  historical  in- 
formation of  Western  Christendom  throughout  the  middle  age. 
Peospee  Aquitanus,  a  Mend  of  Augustine  and  defender  of 
the  doctrines  of  free  grace  against  the  Semi-Pelagians  in  Gaul, 
continued  the  Chronicle  to  the  year  449  ;  later  authors  brought 
it  down  to  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century. 

More  original  is  the  Catalogue  of  Illustrious  Authors," 
which  Jerome  composed  in  the  tenth  year  of  Theodosius 
(a.  d.  392  and  393),'  at  the  request  of  his  friend,  an  officer, 
Dexter.  It  is  the  pioneer  in  the  history  of  theological  litera- 
tm-e,  and  gives,  in  one  hundred  and  thirty-five  chapters,  short 
biographical  notices  of  as  many  ecclesiastical  writers,  from  the 

Comp.  Clericus:  Eusebii  Onomasticon  cum  versione  Hieronymi,  Amstel.  1707,  and 
a  modern  convenient  edition  in  Greek  and  Latin  by  F.  Larsow  and  G.  Partukt, 
Berlin,  1862. 

'  Opera,  viii.  1-820,  including  the  Greek  fragments.  There  is  added  also  the 
Chronicon  of  Prosper  Aquitanus  (pp.  821-856),  and  the  Apparatus,  Castigationes 
et  Nota3  of  Arn.  Poxtac.  We  must  mention  also  the  famous  separate  edition  of 
Jerome's  Clironicle  and  its  continuators  by  Joseph  Scaliger  :  Thesaurus  temporum 
Eusebii  Pamphili,  Hieronymi,  Prosper!,  etc.,  Lugd.  Bat.  1606,  ed.  altera  Amstel. 
1658.  Scaligpr  and  YaUarsi  have  spent  immense  industry  and  acuteness  in  editing 
this  work  made  very  difficult  by  the  many  chronological  and  other  blunders  and 
the  corruptions  of  the  text  caused  by  ignorant  and  careless  transcribers.  The 
Chronicle  of  Eusebius  is  now  known  also  in  an  Armenian  translation,  edited  by 
Angelo  Mai,  Rome,  1833.  The  Greek  original  is  lost  with  the  exception  of  a  few 
fragments  of  Syncellus. 

^  Liber  de  illustribus  viris,  or  De  scriptoribus  ecclesiasticis,  frequently  quoted 
by  the  title  Catalogus.  See  Opera,  ed.  Vallarsi,  torn.  ii.  821-956,  together  with  the 
Greek  translation  of  Pseudo-Sophronius. 

'  Tliis  date  is  given  by  himself,  cap.  133,  in  which  he  speaks  of  his  own  writings. 


982  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

apostles  to  Jerome  himself,  witli  accounts  of  their  most  import- 
ant works.  It  was  partly  designed  to  refute  the  charge  of 
ignorance,  which  Celsus,  Porphyry,  Julian,  and  other  pagans, 
made  against  the  Christians.  Jerome,  at  that  time,  was  not 
yet  so  violent  a  heretic-hater,  and  was  quite  fair  and  liberal  in 
his  estimate  of  such  men  as  Origen  and  Eusebius.'  But  many 
of  his  sketches  are  too  short  and  meagre ;  even  those,  for  exam- 
ple, of  so  important  men  as  Cyprian,  Athanasius,  Basil  the 
Great,  Gregory  of  ISTyssa,  Epiphanius,  Ambrose,  and  Chrysos- 
tom  (f  407).*  His  junior  cotemporary,  Augustine,  who  had  at 
that  time  already  written  several  philosophical,  exegetical,  and 
polemic  works,  he  entirely  omits. 

The  Catalogue  was  afterwards  continued  in  the  same  spirit 
by  the  Semi-Pelagian  Gennadius  of  Marseilles,  by  Isidoke  of 
Seville,  by  Ii,defonsus,  and  by  others,  into  the  middle  age. 

Jerome  wrote  also  biographies  of  celebrated  hermits,  Paul 
of  Thebes  (a.  d.  375),  Hilaeion,  and  the  imj^risoned  Malchus 
(a.  d.  390),  in  very  graceful  and  entertaining  style,  bat  with 
many  fabulous  and  superstitious  accompaniments,  and  with 
extravagant  veneration  of  the  monastic  life,  which  he  aimed  by 
these  writings  to  promote.^  They  were  read  at  that  time  as 
eagerly  as  novels.  These  biographies,  and  several  necrological 
letters  in  honor  of  deceased  friends,  such  as  Nepotian,  Luciuius, 

'  In  the  very  first  chapter  he  says  of  the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter  that  it  was  by 
most  rejected  as  spurious  "  propter  styli  cum  priore  dissonantiam."  A  thorough 
investigation,  however,  leads  to  a  more  favorable  result  as  to  the  genuineness  of 
this  Epistle.  He  admits  in  his  catalogue  even  heretics,  as  Tatian,  Bardesanes,  and 
Priscillian,  also  the  Jews  Philo  and  Josephus,  and  the  heathen  philosopher  Seneca. 

"^  Of  Chrysostom  he  merely  says,  cap.  129:  "Joannes  Antiochenae  ecclesife  pres- 
byter, Eusebii  Emiseni  Diodorique  sectator,  multa  componere  dicitur,  de  quibus 
irepi  Upcaavvr]^  tantum  legi."  But  afterwards,  during  the  Origenistic  controversies, 
he  translated  a  passionate  libel  of  Theophilus  of  Alexandria  agains*  Chrysostom, 
and  praised  it  as  a  valuable  book  {comp.  Ep.  114  ad  Theophilum,  written  405). 
Fragments  of  this  miserable  Libellus  Theophili  contra  Joannem  Chrysost.  are  pre- 
served in  the  Defensio  trium  capp.  1.  vi.  by  Facuudus  of  Hermiane. 

^  Opera,  torn.  ii.  1  sqq.  In  most  of  the  former  editions  these  Vit?e  are  wrongly 
placed  among  the  Epistles.  To  the  same  class  of  writings  belongs  the  translation 
of  the  Regula  Pachomii.  Characteristic  is  the  judgment  of  Gibbon  (ch.  xxxvii.  ad 
aun.  370) :  "  The  stories  of  Paul,  Hilarion,  and  Malchus  by  Jerome  are  admirably 
told :  and  the  only  defect  of  these  pleasing  compositions  is  the  want  of  truth  and 
common  sense." 


§  177.   THE  "WORKS  OF  JEROME.  983 

Lea,  Blasilla,  Paulina,  Paula,  and  Marcella,  are  masterpieces 
of  rhetorical  ascetic  liagiograplij.  Tliey  introduce  the  legend- 
ary literature  of  the  middle  age,  with  its  indiscriminate  mix- 
ture of  history  and  fable,  and  its  sacrifice  of  historical  truth  to 
popular  edification. 

III.  Of  the  POLEMIC  DOCTRINAL  and  ETHICAL  woi'ks '  some 
relate  to  the  Arian  controversies,  some  to  the  Origenistic, 
some  to  the  Pelagian.  In  the  first  class  belongs  the  Dialogue 
against  the  schismatic  Luciferians,^  which  Jerome  wrote  dur- 
ing his  desert  life  in  Syria  (a.  d.  379)  on  the  occasion  of  the 
Meletian  schism  in  Antioch ;  also  his  translation  of  the  work 
of  Didymus  On  the  Holy  Ghost,  begun  in  Rome  and  finished 
in  Bethlehem.  His  book  Against  Bishop  John  of  Jerusalem 
(a.  d.  399),  and  his  Apology  to  his  former  friend  Eufinus,  in 
three  books  (a.  d.  402-403),  are  directed  against  Origenism.' 
In  the  third  class  belongs  the  Dialogue  against  the  Pelagians, 
in  three  books  (a.  d.  415).  Other  polemic  works,  Against 
Helvidius  (written  in  383),  Against  Jovinian  (a.  d.  393),  and 
Against  Yigilantius  (dictated  rapidly  in  one  night  in  406),  are 
partly  doctrinal,  partly  ethical  in  their  nature,  and  mainly 
devoted  to  the  advocacy  of  the  immaculate  virginity  of  Mary, 
celibacy,  vigils,  relic-worship,  and  the  monastic  life. 

These  controversial  writings,  the  contents  of  which  we  have 
already  noted  in  the  proper  place,  do  the  author,  on  the  whole, 
little  credit,  and  stand  in  striking  contrast  with  his  fame  as 

'  All  in  the  second  volume  of  the  editions  of  Vallarsi  (p.  IVl  sqq.)  and  Migne 
(p.  155  sqq.). 

^  Altercatio  Luciferiani  et  Orthodoxi,  or  Dialogus  contra  Luciferianos.  The 
Luciferians  had  their  name  from  Lucifer,  bishop  of  Calaris  in  Sardinia  (died  371), 
the  head  of  the  strict  Athanasian  party,  who  arbitrarily  ordained  Paulinus  bishop 
of  Antioch  in  opposition  to  the  legitimate  Meletius  (362),  because  the  latter  had  been 
elected  by  the  Arian  or  Serai-Arian  party,  although  immediately  after  his  ordination 
he  had  given  in  his  adhesion  to  the  Nicene  faith.  Lucifer  afterwards  fell  out  with 
the  orthodox  and  organized  a  new  schismatic  party,  which  adopted  Novatian  prin- 
ciples of  discipline,  but  in  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century  gradually  returned  to 
the  bosom  of  the  Catholic  church. 

^  Besides  these  Jerome  translated  several  letters  of  Epiphanius  and  Theophilus 
of  Alexandria  against  the  Origenists,  which  have  been  incorporated  by  Vallarsi  with 
the  collection  of  Jerome's  Epistles. 


984  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

one  of  tlie  principal  saints  of  the  Roman  church.  They  show 
an  accurate  acquaintance  with  all  the  arts  of  an  advocate  and 
all  the  pugilism  of  a  dialectician,  together  with  boundless 
vehemence  and  fanatical  zealotism,  which  scruple  over  no 
weapons  of  wit,  mockery,  irony,  suspicion,  and  calumny,  to 
annihilate  opponents,  and  which  pursue  them  even  after  their 
death."  And  their  contents  afford  no  sufficient  compensation 
for  these  faults.  For  Jerome  was  not  an  original,  profound, 
systematic,  or  consistent  thinker,  and  therefore  very  little  fitted 
for  a  didactic  theologian.  In  the  Arian  controversy  he  would 
not  enter  into  any  discussion  of  the  distinction  between  ovarla 
and  vTToaraaL'i,  and  left  this  important  question  to  the  decision 
of  the  Roman  bishop  Damasus ;  in  the  Origenistic  controversy 
he  must,  in  his  violent  condemnation  of  all  Origenists,  contra- 
dict his  own  former  view  and  veneration  of  Origen  as  the 
greatest  teacher  after  the  Apostles ;  and  in  the  Pelagian  con- 
troversy he  was  influenced  chiefly  by  personal  considerations, 
and  drawn  half  way  to  Augustine's  side;  for  while  he  was 
always  convinced  of  the  universality  of  sin,""  in  reference  to  the 
freedom  of  the  will  and  predestination  he  adopted  synergistic 
or   Semi-Pelagian   views,    and   afterwards   continued    in   the 

'  Of  the  dead  Jovinian  he  says  (Adv.  Vigil,  c.  1):  "Ille  Komanse  ecclesise  auc- 
toritate  damnatus,  inter  phasides  aves  et  carnes  suillas  non  tarn  emisit  spiritum, 
quam  eructavit."  He  threatened  his  former  friend  "Rufinus,  whose  language  he  had 
perverted  into  a  threat  to  take  his  life,  with  a  hbel  suit,  and  after  his  death  in  410 
he  wrote  in  an  ignoble  sense  of  triumph  (in  the  Prologue  to  his  Commentary  on 
Ezekiel) :  "  Scorpius  inter  Enceladum  et  Porphyrionem  Trinacriae  humo  premitur,  et 
hydra  multorum  capitum  contra  nos  aliquando  sibilare  cessavit."  From  Jerome's 
polemical  writings  cue  would  form  a  most  unfavorable  opinion  of  Rufiuus.  Two 
divines  of  Aquileja,  Fontaniui  and  Maria  de  Rubeis,  felt  it  their  duty  to  vindicate 
hLs  memory  against  unjust  aspersions.  Comp.  Zockler,  1.  c.  p.  266  f.  Augustine, 
in  a  letter  to  Jerome  (Ep.  Hieron.  110,  c.  10),  called  it  a  "magnum  et  triste  mira- 
culum,"  that  the  friendship  of  Jerome  and  Rufinus  should  have  turned  into  such 
enmity,  and  urged  him  to  reconciliation,  but  in  vain.  This  change,  however,  is 
easily  explained,  since  hatred  is  only  inverted  love.  Rufinus,  it  must  be  remem- 
bered, had  not  spared  Jerome,  and  charged  him  even  with  worse  than  heathen 
unpiety  for  calling,  in  hyper-ascetic  zeal,  Paula,  the  mother  of  the  nun  Eusto- 
chium,  the  "mother-in-law  of  God."  (socrus  Dei).  See  his  Ep.  xxii.  c.  20  ad 
Paulam. 

^  Comp.  particularly  the  passage.  Dial.  adv.  Pelag.  1.  ii.  c.  4  (tom.  ii.  p. 
744). 


§   177.      THE    WOKKS    OF   JEKOME.  98 5 

highest   consideration   among    the    Semi-Pelagians   down   to 
Erasmus.' 

He  is  equally  unsatisfactory  as  a  moralist  and  practical 
divine.  lie  had  no  connected  system  of  moral  doctrine,  and 
did  not  penetrate  to  the  basis  and  kernel  of  the  Christian  life, 
but  moved  in  the  outer  circle  of  asceticism  and  casuistry. 
Following  the  spirit  of  his  time,  he  found  the  essence  of  relig- 
ion in  monastic  flight  from  the  world  and  contempt  of  the 
natural  ordinances  of  God,  especially  of  marriage ;  and,  com- 
pletely reversing  sound  principles,  he  advocated  even  ascetic 
filth  as  an  external  mark  of  inward  purity.^  Of  marriage,  he 
had  a  very  low  conception,  regarding  it  merely  as  a  necessary 
evil  for  the  increase  of  virgins.  From  the  expression  of 
Paul  in  1  Cor.  vii.  1 :  "It  is  good  not  to  touch  a  woman,"  he 
draws  the  utterly  miwarranted  inference :  "  It  is  therefore  bad 
to  touch  one ;  for  the  only  opposite  of  good  is  bad  ;  "  and  he 
interprets  the  woe  of  the  Lord  upon  those  that  are  with  child 
and  those  that  give  suck  (Matt.  xxiv.  19),  as  a  condemnation 
of  pregnancy  in  general,  and  of  the  ciyiug  of  little  children, 

'  Hence  it  is  not  accidental,  that  several  writings  of  Pelagius,  his  Commentary 
on  the  Epistles  of  Paul  (with  some  emendations),  his  Epistola  ad  Demetriadem  de 
virginitate,  his  Libellus  fidei  addressed  to  pope  Innocent,  and  the  Epistola  ad  Celan- 
tiam  matronam  de  ratione  pie  vivendi  (which  was  probably  likewise  written  by  him), 
found  their  way,  by  an  irony  of  history,  into  the  writings  of  Jerome,  on  a  seeming 
resemblance  in  spirit  and  aim. 

'■'  "  Difficile  inter  epulas  servatur  pudicitia.  Nitens  cutis  sordidum  ostendit  ani- 
mum."  So  he  wrote  to  two  ladies,  a  mother  and  her  daughter  in  Gaul,  Ep.  IIY,  c.  6 
(torn.  i.  '786).  St.  Anthony,  the  patriarch  of  monks,  and  other  saints  of  the  desert 
were  of  the  same  opinion,  who  washed  themselves  but  seldom  and  combed  their  hair 
but  once  in  a  year,  on  holy  Easter  (when  they  ought  to  have  been  eminently  holy, 
that  is,  according  to  their  notions,  eminently  slovenly).  What  a  contrast  this  to  our 
modem  principle  that  cleanUness  is  next  to  godliness !  We  must,  however,  judge 
this  catholic  ascetic  cynicism  from  the  stand-point  of  antiquity.  Even  Socrates, 
starting  from  the  principle  that  freedom  from  need  was  divine,  despised  undergar- 
ments and  shoes,  and  contented  himself  with  a  miserable  cloak.  Yet  he  did  not 
neglect  cleanliness  altogether,  and  censured  his  disciple  Antisthenes,  who  ostenta- 
tiously wore  a  dirty  and  torn  cloak,  by  reminding  him :  "  Friend,  vanity  peeps  out 
from  the  holes  of  thy  cloak."  Man  is  by  nature  lazy  and  dirty.  Industry  and 
cleanliness  are  the  fruit  of  discipline  and  civihzation.  In  this  respect  Europe  is  in 
advance  of  Asia,  the  Teutonic  races  in  advance  of  the  Latin.  The  Italians  call  the 
English  and  Americans,  soap-wasters.  The  use  of  soap  and  of  the  razor  is  a  test  of 
modem  civilization. 


986 


THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 


and  of  all  tlie  trouble  and  fruit  of  the  married  life.  The  dis- 
agreeable fact  of  the  marriage  of  Peter  he  endeavors  to  weaken 
by  the  groundless  assumption  that  the  apostle  forsook  his  wife 
when  he  forsook  his  net,  and,  besides,  that  "he  must  have 
washed  away  the  stain  of  his  married  life  by  the  blood  of  his 
martyrdom." ' 

In  a  letter,  otherwise  very  beautiful  and  rich,  to  the  young 
ITepotian,"  he  gives  this  advice :  "  Let  your  lodgings  be  rarely 
or  never  visited  by  women.  You  must  either  ignore  alike,  or 
love  alike,  all  the  daughters  and  virgins  of  Christ,  ^ay, 
dwell  not  under  the  same  roof  with  them,  nor  tnist  their 
former  chastity ;  you  cannot  be  holier  than  David,  nor  wiser 
than  Solomon.  JS^ever  forget  that  a  woman  drove  the  inhab- 
itants of  Paradise  out  of  their  possession.  In  sickness  any 
brother,  or  your  sister,  or  your  mother,  can  minister  to  you 
In  the  lack  of  such  relatives,  the  church  herself  maintains 
many  aged  women,  whom  you  can  at  the  same  time  remuner- 
ate for  their  nursing  with  welcome  alms.  I  know  some  who 
are  well  in  the  body  indeed,  but  sick  in  mind.  It  is  a  dan- 
gerous service  in  any  case,  that  is  done  to  you  by  one  whose 
face  you  often  see.  If  in  your  official  duty  as  a  clergyman 
you  must  visit  a  widow  or  a  maiden,  never  enter  her  house 
alone.  Take  with  you  only  those  whose  company  does  you  no 
shame ;  only  some  reader,  or  acolyth,  or  psalm-singer,  whose 
ornament  consists  not  in  clothes,  but  in  good  morals,  who  does 
not  crimp  his  hair  with  crisping,  pins,  but  shows  chastity  in 
his  whole  bearing.  But  privately  or  without  witnesses,  never 
put  yourself  in  the  presence  of  a  woman." 

Such  exhortations,  however,  were  quite  in  the  spirit  of  that 
age,  and  were  in  part  founded  in  Jerome's  own  bitter  expe- 
rience in  his  youth,  and  in  the  thoroughly  corrupt  condition  of 
social  life  in  the  sinking  empire  of  Eome. 

While  advocating  these  ascetic  exti'avagancies  Jerome  does 
not  neglect  to  chastise  the  clergy  and  the  monks  for  their  faults 


'  Compare  the  work  Against  Jovinian,  1.  i.  c.  T,  10,  12,  13,  15,  16,  26,  33,  etc., 
and  several  of  his  ascetic  letters.     Some  of  his  utterances  on  the  state  of  matrimony         • 
gave  offence  even  to  his  monastic  friends. 

"  Ep.  52  (i.  254  sqq.)  de  vita  clericorum  et  monachorum,  c.  5. 


^^^rU^rti  o.  /f-ys^ 


■n^  ^z/a.A  i^/c^iL^ ^^^^n^^<^  aJin^  ^^Y^e^   ^^  ^^elSSi  _  *W^-:^i^  - 


^' 


,11  JUAH 


§  177.   THE  "WORKS  OF  JEKOME.  987 

with  the  scourge  of  cutting  satire.  And  his  -writings  are  every- 
Tvliere  strewn  witli  the  pearls  of  beautiful  moral  maxims  and 
eloquent  exhortations  to  contempt  of  the  ^vorld  and  godly 
conduct.' 

TV.  The  Epistles  of  Jerome,  with  all  their  defects,  are  un- 
commonly instructive  and  interesting,  and,  in  easy  flow  and 
elegance  of  diction,  are  not  inferior  to  the  letters  of  Cicer^T? 
Yallarsi  has  for  the  first  time  put  them  into  chronological 
order  in  the  first  volume  of  his  edition,  and  has  made  the 
former  numbering  of  them  (even  that  of  the  Benedictine  edi- 
tion) obsolete.  He  reckons  in  ^1  a  hundred  and  fifty,  includ- 
ing several  letters  from  cotemporaries,  such  as  Epiphanius, 
Theophilus  of  Alexandria,  Augustine,  Damasus,  Pammachius, 
and  Rufinus ;  some  of  them  written  directly  to  Jerome,  and 
some  treating  of  matters  in  which  he  was  interested.  They 
are  addressed  to  friends  like  the  Roman  bishop  Damasus,  the 
senator  Pammachius,  the  bishop  Paulinus  of  Nola,  Theophilus 
of  Alexandria,  Evangelus,  Rufinus,  Heliodorus,  Riparius, 
Nepotianus,  Oceanus,  Avitus,  Rusticus,  Gaudentius,  and 
Augustine,  and  some  to  distinguished  ascetic  women  and 
maidens  like  Paula,  Eustochium,  Marcella,  Furia,  Fabiola, 
and  Demetrias.  They  treat  of  almost  all  questions  of  philos- 
ophy and  practical  religion,  which  then  agitated  the  Christian 
world,  and  they  faithfully  reflect  the  virtues  and  the  faults 
and  the  remarkable  contrasts  of  Jerome  and  of  his  age.    / 

Orthodox  in  theology  and  Christology,  Semi-Pelagian  in 
anthropology,  Romanizing  in  the  doctrine  of  the  church  and 
tradition,  anti-chiliastic  in  eschatology,  legalistic  and  ascetic  in 
ethics,  a  violent  fighter  of  all  heresies,  a  fanatical  apologist  of 
all  monkish  extravagancies, — Jerome  was  revered  throughout 
the  catholic  middle  age  as  the  patron  saint  of  Christian  and 
ecclesiastical  learning,  and,  next  to  Augustine,  as  maximus 
doctor  ecclesice  I  but  by  his  enthusiastic  love  for  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  his  recourse  to  the  original  languages,  his  classic 

'  Comp.  a  collection  of  the  principal  doctrinal  and  moral  sentences  of  Jerome  in 
Z.icKLER,  p.  429  ff.  and  p.  458  fi". 


»/ 


988  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

translation  of  the  Bible,  and  liis  manifold  exegetical  merits,  lie 
also  played  materially  into  the  hands  of  the  Reformation,  and 
as  a  scholar  and  an  author  still  takes  the  first  rank,  and  as  an 
influential  theologian  the  second  (after  Augustine),  among  the 
Latin  fathers ;  while,  as  a  moral  character,  he  decidedly  falls 
behind  many  others,  like  Hilary,  Ambrose,  and  Leo  I.,  and, 
even  according  to  the  standard  of  Roman  asceticism,  can  only 
in  a  very  limited  sense  be  regarded  as  a  saint.* 


§  178.    Augustine. 

T.  S.  AtJEELii  Attqustixi  Hipponensis  episcopi  Opera  .  .  .  Post  Lovanien- 
sium  theologorum  recensionem  [whicli  appeared  at  Antwerp  in  1577 
in  11  vols.]  castigatus  [referring  to  tomus  primus,  etc.]  deuuo  ad  MSS, 
codd.  Gallicanos,  etc.  Opera  et  studio  monacliorum  ordinis  S.  Bene- 
dicti  e  congregatione  S.  Mauri  [Fr.  Delfau,  Th.  Blampin,  P.  Coustant, 
and  CI.  Guesnie].  Paris,  1679-1700,  xi  torn,  in  8  fol.  vols.  The  same 
edition  reprinted,  with  additions,  at  Antwerp,  1700-1703,  12  parts  in 
9  fol. ;  and  at  Venice,  1729-34,  in  xi  torn,  in  8  fol.  (this  is  the  edi- 
tion from  which  I  have  generally  quoted ;  it  is  not  to  be  confounded 
with  another  Venice  edition  of  1756-69  in  xviii  vols.  4to,  which  is 
full  of  printing  errors)  ;  also  at  Bassano,  1807,  ia  18  vols. ;  by  Gaume 
fratres,  Paris,  1836-39,  in  xi  torn,  in  22  parts  (a  very  elegant  edi- 
tion); and  lastly  by  /.  P.  Migjie,  Petit-Montrouge,  1841-'49,  in  xii 
torn.  (Patrol.  Lat.  tom.  xxxii.-xlvii.).  Migne's  edition  (which  I  have 
also  used  occasionally)  gives,  in  a  supplementary  volume  (tom,  xii.), 
the  valuable  Notitia  literaria  de  vita,  scriptis  et  editionibus  Aug.  from 
ScmoyEMANN's  Bibliotheca  historico-literaria  Patrum  Lat.  vol.  ii.  Lips. 
1794,  the  Vindicige  Augustinian^  of  Norisius,  and  the  writings  of 
Augustine  first  published  by  Fontanini  and  Angelo  Mai.     But  a  thor- 

'  Comp.  the  various  estimates  of  Jerome  at  §  41  (p.  214)  above ;  iu  Vallarsi, 
Opera  Hier.,  tom.  xi.  282-300,  and  in  Zockler,  1.  c.  pp.  465-416.  In  the  preface 
to  his  valuable  monograph  (p.  v)  Zockler  says :  "  Jerome  is  chiefly  the  orator  and 
the  scholar  among  the  fathers.  His  hfe  is  essentially  neither  the  life  of  a  monk,  nor 
a  priest — for  monk  and  priest  he  was  only  by  the  way — nor  that  of  a  saint — for  he 
was  no  saint  at  all,  at  least  not  in  the  sense  of  the  Roman  church.  It  is  from  be- 
ginning to  end  the  life  of  a  scholar,  a  life  replete  with  literary  studies  and  all  sorts 
of  scholarly  enterprises."  This  judgment  we  can  subscribe  only  with  two  qualifica- 
tions :  he  was  as  much  a  monk  as  a  scholar,  and  exerted  an  extraordinary  influence 
on  the  spread  of  monasticism  in  the  West ;  and  his  reputation  as  a  saint  rests  pre- 
cisely on  the  Romish  overestimate  of  asceticism,  as  distinguished  from  the  evangel- 
ical Protestant  form  of  piety. 


,A;<:<>^6/.  -^     i:<e^.   Cr^ 


§  1Y8.      AUGUSTDTE.  989 

oughly  reliable  critical  edition  of  Augustine  is  still  a  desideratum./  On 
the  controversies  relating  to  the  merits  of  the  Bened.  edition,  see  the 
supplementary  volume  of  Migne,  xii.  p.  40  sqq.,  and  Thuillier  :  Ilis- 
toire  de  la  nouvelle  ed.  de  S.  Aug.  par  les  PP.  Benc-dictins,  Par.  17S0. 
The  first  printed  edition  of  Augustine  appeared  at  Basle,  14S9-'95 ; 
another,  a.  1509,  in  11  vols.  (I  have  a  copy  of  this  edition  in  black 
letter,  but  without  a  title  page) ;  then  the  edition  of  Erasmus  published 
by  Frobenius,  Bas.  1528-29,  in  10  vols.  fol. ;  the  Editio  Lovaniensis, 
or  of  the  divines  of  Louvain,  Antw.  1577,  in  11  vols.,  and  often.  Sev- 
eral works  of  Augustine  have  been  often  separately  edited,  especially 
the  Confessions  and  the  City  of  God.  Compare  a  full  list  of  the 
editions  down  to  1794  in  ScnoxEiiAXN's  Bibliotheca,  vol.  ii.  p.  73 
sqq.  ^*«A-»<  /^ 
II.  PossiDius  (Calamensis  episcopus,  a  pupil  and  friend  of  Aug.) :  Vita 
Augustini  (brief,  but  authentic,  written  432,  two  years  after  his  death, 
in  torn.  X.  Append.  257-280,  ed.  Bened.,  and  in  nearly  all  other  edi- 
tions). Benedictini  Editoees:  Yita  Augustini  ex  ejus  potissimum 
scriptis  concinnata,  in  8  books  (very  elaborate  and  extensive),  in  torn, 
xi.  1-492,  ed.  Bened.  (in  Migne's  reprint,  torn.  i.  pp.  66-578).  The 
biographies  of  Tlllemoxt  (Mem.  torn,  xiii.) ;  Ellies  Dupdj  (Xouvelle 
bibliotheque  des  auteurs  ecclesiastiques,  torn.  ii.  and  iii.)  ;  P.  Bayle 
(Dictionnaire  historique  et  critique,  art.  Augustin) ;  Remi  Oeilliee 
(Histoire  generale  des  auteurs  sacres  et  eccles.,  vol.  xi.  and  xii.) ;  Cave 
(Lives  of  the  Fathers,  vol.  ii.) ;  Exoth  (Der  heil.  Aug.,  Aachen,  1840, 
2  vols.) ;  BoHEiNGEE  (Kirchcngeschichte  in  Biographien,  vol.  i.  P. 
iii.  p.  99  ff.) ;  Pocjotjlat  (Histoire  de  S.  Aug.  Par.  1843  and  1852,  2 
vols. ;  the  same  in  German  by  Fr.  Hurler,  Schaffh.  1847,  2  vols.) ; 
EiSENBAETH  (Stuttg.  1853);  Ph.  Schaff  (St.  Augustine,  Berlin,  1854;  yy. 
English  ed.  Kew  York  and  London,  1854)*  0.  Bixdemaxn  (Der  heilj/^ 
Aug.,  vol.  i.  Berl.  1844;   voL  ii.  1855,^^^srf^.     Beau>t::Mo^    vfT^./cf^ 


mid  Augustin.     Grimma,  1846.»,^Comp.  also  the  literature  at  §146,    /8?F 
The  PTiilosopTiy  of  Augustine  is  discussed  in  the  larger  Histories       '^' 


p  YS3  '  ~^^  '    ••'■■''^       ^^    •<^'.4".:-j:--,    ■-.^r.-.t  f  Jff 


of  Philosophy  by  Beuckee,  Texxemann,  Rixnee,  H.  Eittee  (vol.  vi.  tsrp    / 

pp.  153-443),  Htjbee  (Philosophic  der  Kirchenvater),/Snd  in  the  fol-  /  '^ ==• 

lowing  works:    Theod.  Gangahf:    Metaphysische  Psychologic  des  C^^*"^f^^ 

heil.  Augustinus.     Iste  Abtheilung,  Augsburg,  1852^  T.  Theey  :  Le  ^^^'^•*^ 

genie  philosophique  et  litteraire  de  saint  Augustin.     Par.  1861.  Abb6  ^*^  *9o6^ 

Flottes:  itudes  sur  saint  Aug.,  son  genie,  son  ame,  sa  philosophic,  ^tfj./^' 

Par.  1861.    Noueeissox:  La  phUosophie  de  saint  Augustin  (ouvrage  '^^^^'J 
couronn6  par  I'lnstitut  de  France),  deuxi^me  ed.  Par.  1866,  2  vols. 

It  is  a  venturesome  and  delicate  undertaking  to  write  one's 
0"^n  life,  even  though  that  life  be  a  mastei-piece  of  nature  or 


990  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

of  the  grace  of  God,  and  therefore  most  worthy  to  be  described. 
Of  all  autobiographies  none  has  so  happily  avoided  the  reef  of 
vanity  and  self-praise,  and  none  has  won  so  much  esteem  and 
love  through  its  honesty  and  humility  as  that  of  St.  Augus- 
tine. 

The  "  Confessions,"  which  he  wi'ote  in  the  forty-sixth  year 
of  his  life,  still  burning  in  the  ardor  of  his  first  love,  are  full 
of  the  fire  and  unction  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  They  are  a  sublime 
efi'usion,  in  which  Augustine,  like  David  in  the  fifty-first 
Psalm,  confesses  to  God,  in  view  of  his  own  and  of  succeeding 
generations,  without  reserve  the  sins  of  hi^  yauth^>  and  they 
are  at  the  same  time  a  hymn  of  praise  to  the  grace  of  God, 
which  led  him  out  of  darkness  into  light,  and  called  him  to 
service  in  the  kingdom  of  Christ.'  Here  we  see  the  great 
church  teacher  of  all  times  "  prostrate  in  the  dust,  conversing* 
with  God,  basking  in  his  love ;  his  readers  hovering  before 
him  only  as  a  shadow."  He  puts  away  from  himself  all  honor, 
all  greatness,  all  beauty,  and  lays  them  gratefully  at  the  feet 
of  the  All-merciful.  The  reader  feels  on  every  hand  that 
Christianity  is  no  dream  nor  illusion,  but  truth  and  life,  and 
he  is  carried  along  in  adoration  of  the  wonderful  grace  of 
God.  - 

AuEELius  AuGUSTTNrs,  bom  on  the  13th  of  November,  354," 
at  Tagaste,  an  unimjjprtant  village  of  the  fertile  province  Xu- 
midia  in  I^orth  Africa,  not  far  from  Hippo  Kegius,  inherited 
fi*oin  his  heathen  father,  Patricius,'  a  passionate  sensibility, 
from  his  Chiistian  mother,  Monica  (one  of  the  noblest  women 
in  the  history  of  Christianity,  of  a  highly  intellectual  and  spir- 
itual cast,  of  fervent  piety,  most  tender  aflection,  and  all- con- 
quering love),  the  deep  yearning  towards  God  so  grandly  ex- 

'  Augustine  himself  says  of  his  Confessions:  "  Confessionum  mearum  libri  tre- 
decim  et  de  malis  et  de  bonis  meis  Deum  laudant  justum  et  bonum,  atque  in  eum 
excitant  humanuni  intellectura  et  affectum."     Retract.  1.  ii.  c.  6. 

■■^  He  died,  according  to  the  Chronicle  of  his  friend  and  pupil  Prosper  Aquitanus, 
the  28th  of  August,  430  (in  the  third  month  of  the  siege  of  Hippo  by  the  Vandals) ; 
according  to  his  biographer  Possidius  he  lived  seventy-six  years.  The  day  of  his 
birth -Augustine  states  hunself,  De  vita  beata,  §  6  (torn.  i.  300):  "Idibus  Novembris 
mihi  natalis  dies  erat." 

'  He  received  baptism  shortly  before  his  death. 


^  ^-yjyj^iirTc  -    (-j-^-T^    /^    -jh-^jZ-A^    izA^t^^a^  -i-C^t^i/iJt^ a^   ^     -^Ui     ^^e^-Y^ 
^^0l^ri^iJl^  <3t^-^      ff--^^-^       (?^2«'«-' ***-/      /^fc-^^*</    ^V->^       ^»t*,^^Z-yVl<!<^ 

■^^r7^.£^^   a^^  A^^  '^f-i'  ^■t-'^'y^i^  iZ&t*.^' i^"^^^  <y^/^     Ac^l^i^ 
"^^  ^f7i/->^  '^-i'>i^^e^^r.t^,  ^*VT^/^  ,/^-K5'2^?i>^,    ;^/j^^^t5?    ^C^t?^    .*%<^<t- 


§  178.      AUGUSTINE.  991 

pressed  in  liis  sentence :  "  Thou  hast  made  us  for  Thee,  and 
our  heart  is  restless  till  it  rests  in  Thee."  '  This  yearning,  and 
his  reverence  for  the  sweet  and  holy  name  of  Jesus,  though 
crowded  into  the  background,  attended  him  in  his  studies  at 
the  schools  of  Madaura  and  Carthage,  on  his  journeys  to  Rome 
and  Milan,  and  on  his  tedious  wanderings  through  the  laby- 
rinth of  carnal  pleasures,  Manichaean  mock-wisdom,  Academic 
skepticism,  and  Platonic  idealism ;  till  at  last  the  prayers  of 
his  mother,  the  sermons  of  Ambrose,  the  biography  of  St. 
Anthony,  and,  above  all,  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  as  so  many  in- 
struments in  the  hand  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  wrought  in  the  man 
of  three  and  thirty  years  that  wonderful  change  which  made 
him  an  incalculable  blessing  to  the  whole  Christian  world,  and 
brought  even  the  sins  and  errors  of  his  youth  into  the  service 
of  the  trutli." 

A  son  of  so  many  prayers  and  tears  could  not  be  lost,  and 
the  faithful  mother  who  travailed  with  him  in  spirit  with  greater 
pain  than  her  body  had  in  bringing  him  into  the  world,^  was 
permitted,  for  the  encouragement  of  future  mothers,  to  receive 
shortly  before  her  death  an  answer  to  her  prayers  and  expec- 
tations, and  was  able  to  leave  this  world  with  joy  without 
revisiting  her  earthly  home.  For  Monica  died  on  a  homeward 
journey,  in  Ostia  at  the  mouth  of  the  Tiber,  in  her  fifty-sixth 
year,  in  the  arms  of  her  son,  after  enjoying  with  him  a  glorious 
conversation  that  soared  above  the  confines  of  space  and  time, 
and  was  a  foretaste  of  the  eternal  Sabbath-rest  of  the  saints. 

'  Conf.  i.  1 :  "  Fecisti  nos  ad  Te,  et  inquietum  est  cor  nostrum,  donee  requiescat 
in  Te."  In  all  his  aberrations,  which  we  would  hardly  know,  if  it  were  not  from  his 
own  free  confession,  he  never  sunk  to  anything  mean,  but  remained,  like  Paul  in 
his  Jewish  fanaticism,  a  noble  intellect  and  an  honorable  character,  with  burning 
love  for  the  true  and  the  good. 

•  For  particulars  respecting  the  course  of  Augustine's  life,  see  my  work  above 
cited,  and  other  monographs.  Comp.  also  the  fine  remarks  of  Dr.  Baur  in  his 
posthumous  Lectures  on  Doctrine-History  (1866),  vol.  i.  Part  ii.  p.  26  ff.  He  com- 
pares the  development  of  Augustine  with  the  course  of  Christianity  from  the  begin- 
ning to  his  time,  and  draws  a  parallel  between  Augustine  and  Origen. 

^  Conf.  ix.  c.  8  :  "  Quae  me  parturivit  et  came,  ut  in  banc  temporalem,  et  corde, 
ut  in  jetemam  lucem  nascerer."  L.  v.  9  :  "  Xon  enim  satis  eloquor,  quid  erga  me 
habebat  animi,  et  quanto  majore  soUicitudine  me  parturiebat  spiritu,  quam  came 
pepererat." 


JJ 


992  THIKD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

She  regretted  uot  to  die  in  a  foreign  land,  because  sLe  was  not 
far  from  God,  who  would  raise  her  up  at  the  last  day.  "  Bury 
my  body  anywhere,"  was  her  last  request,  "  and  trouble  not 
yourselves  for  it ;  only  this  one  thing  I  ask,  that  you  remember 
me  at  the  altar  of  my  God,  wherever  you  may  be."  '  Augus- 
tine, in  his  Confessions,  has  erected  to  Monica  the  noblest 
monument  that  can  never  perish. 

If  ever  there  was  a  thorough  and  fruitful  conversion,  next 
to  that  of  Faul  on  the  way  to  Damascus,  it  was  that  of  Augus- 
tine, when,  in  a  garden  of  the  Yilla  Cassiciacum,  not  far  from 
Milan,  in  September  of  the  year  3S6,  amidst  the  most  violent 
struggles  of  mind  and  heart — the  birth-throes  of  the  new  life 
— he  heard  that  divine  voice  of  a  child :  "  Take,  read !  "  and  he 
"  put  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ "  (Rom.  xiii.  14).  It  is  a  touching 
lamentation  of  his :  "  I  have  loved  Thee  late,  Thou  Beauty,  so 
old  and  so  new ;  I  have  loved  Thee  late !  And  lo !  Thou  wast 
within,  but  I  was  without,  and  was  seeking  Thee  there.  And 
into  Thy  fair  creation  I  plunged  myself  in  my  ugliness ;  for 
Thou  wast  with  me,  and  I  was  not  with  Thee !  Those  things 
kept  me  away  from  Thee,  which  had  not  been,  except  they 
had  been  in  Thee !  Thou  didst  call,  and  didst  cry  aloud,  and 
break  through  my  deafness.  Thou  didst  glimmer.  Thou  didst 
shine,  and  didst  drive  away  my  blindness.  Thou  didst  breathe, 
and  I  drew  breath,  and  breathed  in  Thee.  I  tasted  Thee,  and 
I  hunger  and  thirst.  Thou  didst  touch  me,  and  I  burn  for 
Thy  peace.  If  I,  with  all  that  is  within  me,  may  once  live 
in  Thee,  then  shall  pain  and  trouble  forsake  me ;  entirely 
filled  with  Thee,  all  shall  be  life  to  me." 

He  received  baptism  from  Ambrose  in  Milan  on  Easter 
Sunday,  387,  in  company  with  his  friend  and  fellow-convert 
Alypius,  and  his  natural  son  Adeodatus  {given  hy  God). 
It  impressed  the  divine  seal  upon  the  inward  transforma- 
tion.    He  broke  radically  with  the  world;    abandoned   the 

*  Conf.  1.  ix.  c.  11:  "Tantum  illud  vos  rogo,  ut  ad  Domini  altare  memineritis 
mei,  ubi  fueritis."  This  must  be  explained  from  the  already  prevailing  custom  of 
offering  prayers  for  the  dead,  which,  however,  had  rather  the  form  of  thanksgiving 
for  the  mercy  of  God  shown  to  them,  than  the  later  form  of  intercession  for  them. 
Comp.  above,  §  84,  p.  432  ff. 


'I 


i-.^^  ...^;w^  ^^^;/^rt  ^^''^  ^^"^^  '''^/'  ^^^""-  ■ 


f^AUCi^  /^c^.<:2i^  ^'^¥^  ^'-^^  -^^7^  ^  ^^  7".^ 

J,   ^4.^^^    Y<-^e.'-'^^     /^<^^^*ii^^  't*^ ^^^'C'^^'^^*^  a^/€e'7c^^U^ 


•^^ 


§   178.      AUGUSTINE.  993 

brilliant  and  lucrative  A'ocation  of  a  teacher  of  rhetoric,  which 
he  had  followed  in  Rome  and  Milan ;  sold  his  goods  for  the 
benefit  of  the  poor :  and  thenceforth  devoted  his  rare  gifts 
exclusively  to  the  service  of  Christ,  and  to  that  service  he 
continued  faithful  to  his  latest  breath.  After  the  death  of  his 
mother,  whom  he  revered  and  loved  with  the  most  tender 
aflfection,  he  went  a  second  time  to  Rome  for  several  months, 
and  wrote  books  in  defence  of  true  Christianity  against  false 
philosophy  and  the  Manichaean  heresy.  Returning  to  Africa, 
he  spent  three  years,  with  his  fi-iends  Alypius  and  Evodius,  on 
an  estate  in  his  native  Tagaste,  in  contemplative  and  literary 
retirement. 

Then,  in  391,  he  was  chosen  presbyter  against  his  will, 
by  the  voice  of  the  people,  which,  as  in  the  similar  cases  of 
Cyprian  and  Ambrose,  proved  to  be  the  voice  of  God,  in  the 
Numidian  maritime  city  of  Hippo  Regius  (now  Bona) ;  and 
in  395  he  was  elected  bishop  in  the  same  city.  For  eight  and 
thii'ty  years,  until  his  death,  he  labored  in  this  place,  and 
made  it  the  intellectual  centre  of  Western  Christendom.' 

His  outward  mode  of  life  was  extremely  simple,  and  mildly 
ascetic.  He  lived  with  his  clergy  in  one  house  in  an  apostolic 
community  of  goods,  and  made  this  house  a  seminary  of 
theology,  out  of  which  ten  bishops  and  many  lower  clergy 
went  forth.  Females,  ev5n  his  sister,  were  excluded  from  his 
house,  and  could  see  him  only  in  the  presence  of  others.  But 
he  founded  religious  societies  of  women ;  and  over  one  of  these 
liis  sister,  a  saintly  widow,  presided."  He  once  said  in  a  ser- 
mon, that  he  had  nowhere  found  better  men,  and  he  had 
nowhere  found  worse,  than  in  monasteries.     Combining,  as  he 

*  He  is  still  known  among  the  inhabitants  of  the  place  as  "  the  great  Christian  "' 
(Rumi  Kebir).  Gibbon  (eh.  xxxiii.  ad  ann.  430)  thus  describes  the  place  which  be- 
came so  famous  through  Augustine :  "  The  maritime  colony  of  Hippo,  about  two 
hundred  miles  westward  of  Carthage,  had  formerly  acquired  the  distinguishing  epi- 
thet of  Begius,  from  the  residence  of  the  Numidian  kings ;  and  some  remains  of 
trade  and  populousness  still  adhere Jto  the  modern  city,  which  is  known  in  Europe 
by  the  corrupted  name  of  Bona.'/  See  below,  p.  996,  note  3. 

*  He  mentions  a  sister,  "soror  mea,  sancta  proposita"  [monasterii],  without 
naming  her,  Epist.  211,  n.  4  (ed.  Bened.),  alias  Ep.  109.  He  also  had  a  brother  by 
the  name  of  Navigius. 

VOL.  II. — 63 


994  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

did,  tlie  clerical  life  with  tlie  monastic,  he  became  unwittingly 
the  founder  of  the  Angustiuian  order,  which  gave  the  reformer 
Luther  to  the  world.  He  wore  the  black  dress  of  the  Eastern 
coenobites,  with  a  cowl  and  a  leathern  girdle.  He  lived  almost 
entirely  on  vegetables,  and  seasoned  the  common  meal  with 
reading  or  free  conversation,  in  which  it  was  a  rule  that  the 
character  of  an  absent  person  should  never  be  touched.  He 
had  this  couplet  engraved  on  the  table : 

"  Quisquis  amat  dictis  absentum  rodere  vitam, 
Hanc  mensam  vetitam  noverit  esse  sibi." 

He  often  preached  five  days  in  succession,  sometimes  twice  a 
day,  and  set  it  as  the  object  of  his  preaching,  that  all  might 
live  with  him,  and  he  with  all,  in  Christ.  Wherever  he  went 
in  Africa,  he  was  begged  to  preach  the  word  of  salvation.'  He 
faithfully  administered  the  external  affairs  connected  with  his 
office,  though  he  found  his  chief  delight  in  contemplation. 
He  was  specially  devoted  to  the  poor,  and,  like  Ambrose,  upon 
exigency,  caused  the  church  vessels  to  be  melted  down  to  re- 
deem prisoners.  But  he  refused  legacies  by  which  injustice 
was  done  to  natural  heirs,  and  commended  the  bishop  Aurelius 
of  Carthage  for  giving  back  unasked  some  property  which  a 
man  had  bequeathed  to  the  church,  when  his  wife  unexpectedly 
bore  him  children. 

Augustine's  labors  extended  far  beyond  his  little  diocese. 
He  was  the  intellectual  head  of  the  ITorth  African  and  the 
entire  Western  church  of  his  time.  He  took  active  interest  in 
all  theological  and  ecclesiastical  questions.  He  was  the  cham- 
pion of  the  orthodox  doctrine  against  Manichsean,  Donatist, 
and  Pelagian.  In  him  was  concentrated  the  whole  polemic 
power  of  the  Catholicism  of  the  time  against  heresy  and  schism ; 
and  in  him  it  won  the  victory  over  them. 

In  his  last  years  he  took  a  critical  review  of  his  literary 
productions,  and  gave  them  a  thorough  sifting  in  his  Retracta- 


'  Possidius  says,  in  his  Vita  Aug. :  "  Cteterum  episcopatu  suscepto  multo  instan- 
tius  ac  ferventius,  majore  auctoritate,  non  in  una  tantum  regione,  sed  ubicunque 
rogatus  veuisset,  verbum  salutis  alacriter  ac  suaviter,  pullulante  atque  crescente 
Domini  ecclesia,  praedicayit." 


§   178.      AUGUSTINE.  995 

tions.  His  latest  controversial  works  against  the  Semi-Pela- 
gians, written  in  a  gentle  spirit,  date  from  the  same  j^eriod. 
He  bore  the  duties  of  his  office  alone  till  his  seventy-second 
year,  when  his  people  unanimously  elected  his  friend  Heraclius 
to  be  his  assistant  and  successor. 

The  evening  of  his  life  was  troubled  by  increasing  infirmi- 
ties of  body  and  by  the  unspeakable  wretchedness  which  the 
barbarian  Yandals  spread  over  his  country  in  their  victorious 
invasion,  destroying  cities,  villages,  and  churches,  without 
mercy,  and  even  besieging  the  fortified  city  of  Hippo.'  Yet 
he  faithfully  persevered  in  his  work.  The  last  ten  days  of  his 
life  he  spent  in  close  retirement,  in  prayers  and  tears  and  re- 
peated reading  of  the  penitential  Psalms,  which  he  had  caused 
to  be  written  on  the  wall  over  his  bed,  that  he  might  have  them 
always  before  his  eyes.  Thus  with  an  act  of  j)enance  he  closed 
his  life.  In  the  midst  of  the  terrors  of  the  siege  and  the  despair 
of  his  people  he  could  not  suspect  what  abundant  seed  he  had 
sown  for  the  future. 

■  In  the  third  month  of  the  siege  of  Hippo,  on  the  28th  of 
August,  430,  in  the  seventy-sixth  year  of  his  age,  in  full  pos- 
session of  his  faculties,  and  in  the  presence  of  many  friends 
and  pupils,  he  passed  gently  and  happily  into  that  eternity  to 
which  he  had  so  long  aspired.  "  O  how  wonderful,"  wrote  he 
in  his  Meditations,"*  "  how  beautiful  and  lovely  are  the  dwell- 
ings of  Thy  house,  Almighty  God !  I  burn  with  longing  to 
behold  Thy  beauty  in  Thy  bridal-chamber.  .  .  .  O  Jeru- 
salem, holy  city  of  God,  dear  bride  of  Christ,  my  heart  loves 
thee,  my  soul  has  already  long  sighed  for  thy  beauty !  .  .  . 
The  King  of  kings  Himself  is  in  the  midst  of  thee,  and  His 
children  are  within  thy  walls.  There  are  the  hymning  choirs 
of  angels,  the  fellowship  of  heavenly  citizens.  There  is  the 
wedding-feast  of  all  who  from  this  sad  earthly  pilgrimage  have 
reached  thy  joys.  There  is  the  far-seeing  choir  of  the  proph- 
ets ;  there  the  number  of  the  twelve  apostles ;  there  the  tri- 
umphant army  of  innumerable  martyrs  and  holy  confessors. 

'  Possidius,  c.  28,  gives  a  vivid  picture  of  the  ravages  of  the  Vandals,  which 
have  become  proverbial.     Comp.  also  Gibbon,  ch.  xxxiii, 
'  I  freely  combine  several  passages. 


996  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Full  and  perfect  love  tliere  reigns,  for  God  is  all  in  all.  They 
love  and  praise,  they  praise  and  love  Him  evermore.  .  .  . 
Blessed,  perfectly  and  forever  blessed,  shall  I  too  be,  if,  when 
my  poor  body  shall  be  dissolved,  ...  I  may  stand  before  my 
lung  and  God,  and  see  Him  in  His  glory,  as  He  Himself  hath 
deigned  to  promise :  '  Father,  I  will  that  they  also  whom  Thou 
hast  given  Me  be  with  Me  where  I  am ;  that  they  may  behold 
My  glory  which  I  had  with  Thee  before  the  world  was.' " 
This  aspiration  after  the  heavenly  Jerusalem  fonnd  grand  ex- 
pression in  the  hymn  De  gloria  et  gaudiis  Paradisi  : 

"Ad  perennis  vitse  fontem  mens  salivit  arida," 

which  is  incorporated  in  the  Meditations  of  Augustine,  and 
the  idea  of  which  originated  in  part  with  him,  though  it  was 
not  brought  into  poetical  form  till  long  afterwards  by  Peter 
Damiani.' 

He  left  no  will,  for  in  his  voluntary  poverty  lie  had  no 
earthly  property  to  dispose  of,  except  his  library ;  this  he  be- 
queathed to  the  church,  and  it  was  fortunately  preserved  from 
the  depredations  of  the  Arian  barbarians.* 

Soon  after  his  death  Hippo  was  taken  and  destroyed  by 
the  Yandals.^     Africa  was  lost  to  the  Romans.     A  few  de- 

'  Comp^ Daniel:   Thesaurus  hymnol.  i.  p.  116  sqq.,  and  iv.  p.  203  sq.Jsil^li. 

*  Possidius  says,  Vita,  c.  31:  "  Testaraentum  nullum  fecit,  quia  unde  faceret, 
pauper  Dei  non  habuit.  Ecclesia3  bibliotliecam  omnesque  codices  diligenter  posteris 
custodiendos  semper  jubebat." 

,  ^  The  inhabitants  escaped  to  the  sea.  There  appears  no  bishop  of  Hippo  after 
Augustine.  In  the  seventh  century  the  old  city  was  uttei-ly  destroyed  by  the  Ara- 
bians, but  two  miles  from  it  Bona  was  built  out  of  its  ruins.  Comp.  Tillemont,  xiii. 
945,  and  Gibbon,  ch.  xxxiii.  Gibbon  says,  that  Bona,  "  in  the  sixteenth  century, 
contained  about  three  hundred  families  of  industrious,  but  turbulent  manufacturers. 
The  adjacent  territory  is  renowned  for  a  pure  air,  a  fertile  soil,  and  plenty  of  exqui- 
site fruits."  Since  the  French  conquest  of  Algiers,  Bona  was  rebuilt  in  1832,  and  ia 
gradually  assuming  a  French  aspect.  It  is  now  one  of  the  finest  towns  in  Algeria, 
the  key  to  the  province  of  Constantine,  has  a  public  garden,  several  schools,  con- 
siderable commerce,  and  a  population  of  over  10,000  of  French,  Moors,  and  Jews, 
the  great  majority  of  whom  are  foreigners.  The  relics  of  St.  Augustine  have  been 
recently  transferred  from  Pavia  to  Bona.  See  the  letters  of  abbo  Sibour  to  Poujou- 
lat  sur  la  translation  de  la  relique  de  saint  Augustm  de  Pavie  k  Hippone,  in  Poujou- 
lat's  Histoire  de  saint  Augustin,  torn.  i.  p.  413  sqq. 


/ 


;^  ^  ^  ..^^V-  ^'^    f^  ^^"^^    ---^-^^ 


^^.(.cc^/i.-^r&7     ^-in^  ^   T^ijie^     t-c-i^^^^ 


lAr^. 


§    178.      AUGUSTINE.  997 

cades  later  the  whole  West-Eoman  empire  fell  in  ruins.  The 
culmination  of  the  African  church  was  the  beginning  of  its 
decline.  But  the  work  of  Augustine  could  not  perish.  His 
ideas  fell  like  living  seed  into  the  soil  of  Europe,  and  produced 
abundant  fruits  in  nations  and  countries  of  which  he  had 
never  heard.' 

AugTistine,  the  man  with  upturned  eye,  with  pen  in  the 
left  hand,  and  a  burning  heart  in  the  right  (as  he  is  usually 
represented),  is  a  philosophical  and  theological  genius  of  the 
first  order,  towering  like  a  pyramid  above  his  age,  and  looking 
down  commandingly  upon  succeeding  centuries.  He  had  a 
mind  uncommonly  fertile  and  deep,  bold  and  soaring ;  and  with 
it,  what  is  better,  a  heart  full  of  Christian  love  and  humility. 
He  stands  of  right  by  the  side  of  the  greatest  philosophers  of 
antiquity  and  of  modern  times.  "We  meet  him  alike  on  the 
broad  highways  and  the  narrow  footpaths,  on  the  giddy  Alpine 
heights  and  in  the  awful  depths  of  speculation,  wherever 
'j)hilosophical  thiakers  before  him  or  after  him  have  trod.  As 
a  theologian  he  is  facile  princeps,  at  least  surpassed  by  no 
church  father,  scholastic,  or  reformer.  With  royal  munifi- 
cence he  scattered  ideas  in  passing,  which  have  set  in  mighty 
motion  other  lands  and  later  times.  He  combined  the  creative 
power  of  TertuUian  with  the  churchly  spu-it  of  Cyprian,  the 
speculative  intellect  of  the  Greek  church  with  the  practical 
tact  of  the  Latin.  He  Avas  a  Christian  philosopher  and  a 
philosophical  theologian  to  the  full.  It  was  his  need  and  his 
delight  to  wrestle  again  and  again  with  the  hardest  problems 
of  thought,  and  to  comprehend  to  the  utmost  the  divinely  re- 

'  Even  in  Africa  Augustine's  spirit  reappeared  from  time  to  time,  notwithstand- 
ing the  barbarian  confusion,  as  a  light  in  darkness,  &"St  in  Yigilius,  bishop  of  T?ap-^ 
sus,  who,  at  the  close  of  the  fifth  century,  ably  defended  the  orthodox  doctrine  of 
the  Trinity  and  the  person  of  Christ,  and  to  whom  the  authorship  of  the  so-called 
Athanasiau  Creed  has  sometimes  been  ascribed ;  in  Fulgextics,  bishop  of  Kuspe, 
one  of  the  chief  opponents  of  Semi-Pelagianism,  and  the  later  Arianism,  who  with 
sixty  catholic  bishops  of  Africa  was  banished  for  several  years  by  the  Arian  Yandals 
to  the  island  of  Sardinia,  and  who  was  called  the  Augustine  of  the  sixth  century 
(died  533);  and  in  Faccxdus  of  HERiiiANE  (died  570),  and  FuLGEXi'ius  Ferrandus 
and  LiBERATUs,  two  deacons  of  Carthage,  who  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  Three 
Chapter  controversy. 


X 


998  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

vealed  matter  of  tlie  faitli.'  He  always  asserted,  indeed,  tlie 
primacy  of  faitli,  according  to  his  maxim :  Fides  jorcBcedit  in- 
tellectum  /  appealing,  witli  theologians  before  him,  to  the  well- 
known  passage  of  Isaiah  vii.  9  (in  the  LXX.) :  "  Nisi  credide- 
ritis,  non  intelligetis."  But  to  him  faith  itself  was  an  acting 
of  reason,  and  from  faith  to  knowledge,  therefore,  there  was  a 
necessary  transition.*  He  constantly  looked  below  the  surface 
to  the  hidden  motives  of  actions  and  to  the  universal  laws  of 
diverse  events.  The  metaphysician  and  the  Christian  believer 
coalesced  in  him.  His  meditatio  passes  with  the  utmost  ease 
into  oratio,  and  his  oratio  into  meditatio.  With  profundity 
he  combined  an  equal  clearness  and  sharpness  of  thought.  He 
was  an  extremely  skilful  and  a  successful  dialectician,  inex- 
haustible in  arguments  and  in  answers  to  the  objections  of  his 
adversaries. 

He  has  enriched  Latin  literature  w^ith  a  greater  store  of 
beautiful,  original,  and  pregnant  proverbial  sayings,  than  any 
classic  author,  or  any  other  teacher  of  the  church.^ 

He  had  a  creative  and  decisive  hand  in  almost  every  dogma 
of  the  church,  completing  some,  and  advancing  others.  The 
centre  of  his  system  is  the  fkee  eedeeming-  gkace  of  God  in 

CdRIST,    OPERATICfG    THROUGH    THE   ACTUAL,    HISTOKICAL   CHURCH. 

^  Or,  as  he  wrote  to  a  friend  about  the  year  410,  Epist.  120,  c.  I,  §  2  (torn.  Ti. 
p.  3-47,  ed.  Bened.  Venet. ;  in  older  ed.,  Ep.  122):  "TJt  quod  credis  intelligas  .  .  . 
non  ut  fidem  respuas,  sed  ea  quae  fidei  firmitate  jam  tenes,  etiam  rationis  luce  con- 
spicias."  He  continues,  ibid.  c.  3  :  "  Absit  namque,  ut  hoc  in  nobis  Deus  oderit,  in 
quo  nos  reliquls  animalibus  excellentiores  creavit.  Absit,  inquam,  ut  ideo  creda- 
mus,  ne  rationem  accipiamus  vel  quaeramus  ;  cum  etiam  credere  non  possemus,  nisi 
rationales  auimas  haberemus."  In  one  of  his  earliest  works,  Contra  Academ.  1.  iil 
c.  20,  §  43,  he  says  of  himself:  "Ita  sum  aflfectus,  ut  quid  sit  verum  non  credendo 
solum,  sed  etiam  intelligendo  apprehendere  impatienter  desiderem." 

"^  Comp.  De  prsed.  sanct,  cap.  2,  §  5  (tom.  x.  p.  792) :  "  Ipsum  credere  nihil 
aliud  est  quam  cum  assensione  cogitare.  Non  enim  omnis  qui  cogitat,  credit,  cum ' 
ideo  cogitant,  pl^irique  ne  credant ;  sed  cogitat  omnis  qui  credit,  et  credendo  cogitat 
et  cogitando  credit.  Fides  si  non  cogitetur,  nulla  est."  Ep.  120,  cap.  1,  §  3  (tom. 
ii.  347),  and  Ep.  137,  c.  4,  §  15  (tom.  ii.  408):  "Intellectui  fides  aditum  aperit, 
infidelitas  claudit."  Augustine's  view  of  faith  and  knowledge  is  discussed  at  large 
by  Gangauf,  Metaphysische  Psychologic  des  heil.  Augustinus,  i.  pp.  31-76,  and  by 
NouRRissoN,  La  philosophic  de  saint  Augustin,  tom.  ii.  282-290. 

^  Prosper  Aquitanus  collected  from  the  works  of  Augustine  a  long  list  of  sen- 
tences (see  the  Appendix  to  the  tenth  vol.  of  the  Bened.  ed.  p.  223  sqq.),  ^vith  ref- 


7       ,  .  .  ^ 


§   178.      AUGUSTINE.  999 

He  is  evangelical  or  Pauline  in  his  doctrine  of  sin  and  grace, 
but  catholic  (that  is,  old-catholic,  not  Roman  Catholic)  in  his 
doctrine  of  the  church.  The  Pauline  clement  comes  forward 
mainly  in  the  Pelagian  controversy,  the  catholic-churchlj 
in  the  Donatist ;  but  each  is  modified  by  the  other. 

Dr.  Baur  incorrectly  makes  freedom  the  fundamental  idea 
of  the  Augustinian  system  (it  mucb  better  suits  the  Pelagian), 
and  founds  on  this  view  an  ingenious,  but  only  half  true,  com- 
parison between  Augustine  and  Origen.  "  There  is  no  church 
teacher  of  the  ancient  period,"  says  he,'  "  who,  in  intellect  and 
in  grandeur  and  consistency  of  view,  can  more  justly  be  placed 
by  the  side  of  Origen  than  Augustine ;  none  who,  with  all  the 
difference  in  individuality  and  in  mode  of  thought,  so  closely 
resembles  him.  How  fai;  both  towered  above  their  times,  is 
most  clearly  manifest  in  the  very  fact  that  they  alone,  of  all 
the  theologians  of  the  first  six  centuries,  became  the  creators 
of  distinct  systems,  each  proceeding  from  its  definite  idea,  and 
each  completely  carried  out ;  and  this  fact  proves  also  how 
much  the  one  system  has  that  is  analogous  to  the  other.  The 
one  system,  like  the  other,  is  founded  upon  the  idea  of  free- 
dom j  in  both  there  is  a  specific  act,  by  which  the  entire  devel- 
opment of  human  life  is  determined ;  and  in  both  this  is  an 


erence  to  theological  purport  and  the  Pelagian  controversies.  We  recall  some  of 
the  best,  which  he  has  omitted : 

"  Novum  Testamentum  in  Yetere  latet,  Yetus  in  Novo  patet." 

"  Distingue  tempora,  et  concordabit  Scriptura," 

"  Cor  nostrum  inquietum  est,  donee  requiescat  in  Te." 

"  Da  quod  jubes,  et  jube  quod  vis." 

"  Non  vincit  nisi  Veritas,  victoria  veritatis  est  caritas." 

"  Ubi  amor,  ibi  trinitas." 

"  Fides  praecedit  intellectum." 

"  Deo  servire  vera  libertas  est." 

"  Nulla  infelicitas  frangit,  quem  felicitas  nulla  corrumpit." 

The  famous  maxim  of  ecclesiastical  harmony:  "In  necessariis  unitas,  in  dubiis 
(or  non  necessariis)  Ubertas,  in  omnibus  (in  utrisque)  caritas," — which  is  often 
ascribed  to  Augustine,  dates  in  this  form  not  from  him,  but  from  a  much  later 
period.  Dr.  Ltjcke  (in  a  special  treatise  on  the  antiquity  of  the  author,  the  original 
form,  etc.,  of  this  sentence,  Gottingen,  1850)  traces  the  authorship  to  Kupekt 
Meldexius,  an  irenical  German  theologian  of  the  seventeenth  century. 

'  L.  c.  p.  30  sq. 


1000  THEED   PEKIOD,    A.D.    311-590. 

act  which  lies  far  outside  of  the  temporal  consciousness  of  the 
individual ;  with  this  difference  alone,  that  in  one  system  the 
act  belongs  to  each  separate  individual  himself,  and  only  falls 
outside  of  his  temporal  life  and  consciousness ;  in  the  other,  it 
lies  within  the  sphere  of  the  temporal  history  of  man,  but  is 
only  the  act  of  one  individual.  If  in  the  system  of  Origen 
nothing  gives  greater  offence  than  the  idea  of  the  pre-existence 
and  fall  of  souls,  which  seems  to  adoj^t  heathen  ideas  into  the 
Christian  faith,  there  is  in  the  system  of  Augustine  the  same 
overleaping  of  individual  life  and  consciousness,  in  order  to 
explain  from  an  act  in  the  past  the  present  sinful  condition  of 
man  ;  but  the  pagan  Platonic  point  of  view  is  exchanged  for 
one  taken  from  the  Old  Testament.  .  .  .  What  therefore 
essentially  distinguishes  the  system  pf  Augustine  from  that  of 
Origen,  is  only  this :  the  fall  of  Adam  is  substituted  for  the 
pre-temporal  fall  of  souls,  and  what  in  Origen  still  wears  a 
heathen  garb,  puts  on  in  Augustine  a  purely  Old  Testament 
form." 

The  learning  of  Augustine  was  not  equal  to  his  genius,  nor 
as  extensive  as  that  of  Origen  and  Eusebius,  but  still  consid- 
erable for  his  time,  and  superior  to  that  of  any  of  the  Latin 
fathers,  with  the  single  exception  of  Jerome.     He  had  received 
mJL  uUioi    in  the  schools  of  Madaura  and  Carthao;e  a-eood-^lteoTetit-al  and- 
<^,.'Pui^M'^  -' ^.  j-lietorical  preparation  for  the  forum,  which  stood  him  in  good 
■^  stead  also  in  theology.     He  was  familiar  with  Latin  literature, 
and  was  by  no  means  blind  to  the  excellencies  of  the  classics, 
though  he  placed  them  far  below  the  higher  beauty  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures.     The  Hortensius  of  Cicero  (a  lost  work)  in- 
spired him  during  his  university  course  with  enthusiasm  for 
philosophy  and  for  the  knowledge  of  truth  for  its  own  sake ; 
the  study  of  Platonic  and  Neo-Platonic  works  (in  the  Latin 
version  of  the  rhetorician  Yictorinus)  kindled  in  him  an  incred- 
ible fire ;  ^  though  in  both  he  missed  the  holy  name  of  Jesus 

^  Adv.  Academicos,  1.  ii.  c.  2,  §  5 :  "  Etiam  mihi  ipsi  de  me  incredibile  incen- 
dium  concitarunt."  And  in  several  passages  of  the  Civitas  Dei  (viii.  3-12  ;  xxii.  27) 
he  speaks  very  favorably  of  Plato,  and  also  of  Aristotle,  and  thus  broke  the  way  for 
the  high  authority  of  the  Aristotelian  philosophy  with  the  scholastics  of  the  middle 


§   178.      AUGUSTINE.  1001 

and  the  cardinal  virtues  of  love  and  humility,  and  found  in 
them  only  beautiful  ideals  without  power  to  conform  him  to 
them.  His  City  of  God,  his  book  on  heresies,  and  other  writ- 
ings, show  an  extensive  knowledge  of  ancient  philosophy, 
poetry,  and  history,  sacred  and  secular.  He  refers  to  the  most 
distinguished  pei-sons  of  Greece  and  Rome ;  he  often  alludes 
to  Pythagoras,  Plato,  Aristotle,  Plotin,  Porphyry,  Cicero, 
Seneca,  Horace,  Yirgil,  to  the  earlier  Greek  and  Latin  fathers, 
to  Eastern  and  Western  heretics.  But  his  knowledge  of  Greek 
literature  was  mostly  derived  fi'om  Latin  translations.  With 
the  Greek  language,  as  he  himself  frankly  and  modestly  con- 
fesses, he  had,  in  comparison  with  Jerome,  but  a  superficial 
acquaintance.'     Hebrew  he  did  not  understand  at  all.     Hence, 

*  It  is  sometimes  asserted  that  he  had  no  knowledge  at  all  of  the  Greek.  So 
Gibbon,  for  example,  says  (ch.  xxxiii.):  "The  superficial  learning  of  Augustine  was 
confined  to  the  Latin  language."  But  this  is  as  much  a  mistake  as  the  other  asser- 
tion of  Gibbon,  that  "  the  orthodoxy  of  St.  Augustine  was  derived  from  the  Mani- 
chaean  school."  In  his  youth  he  had  a  great  aversion  to  the  glorious  language  of  j^^ 
Hellas  (Conf.  i.  14),''Sd  read  the  writings  of  Plato  in  a  Latin  translation  (vii.  9).  '  ^^^^J**^*** 
But  after  his  baptism,  during  his  second  residence  in  Rome,  he  took  it  up  again  ^-J.  C  U, 

with  greater  zest,  for  the  sake  of  his  bibhcal  studies.     In  Hippo  he  had,  while  pres-      ^i^^  t/ti-a^i 
byter,  good  opportunity  to  advance  in  it,  siuce  his  bishop,  Aurelius,  a  native  Greek, 
understood  his  mother  tongue  much  better  than  the  Latin.     In  his  books  he  occa- 
sionally makes  reference  to  the  Greek.     In  his  work  Contra  Jul.  i.  c.  6  §21  (torn. 
X.  510),  he  corrects  the  Pelagian  Julian  in  a  translation  from  Chrysostom,  quoting 
the  original.     "Ego  ipsa  verba  Graeca  quae  a  Joanne  dicta  sunt  ponam:  5to  toOto     A4r/l<Hi'Kvi 
KoX  Tct  TraiSia  /3a7rTi'^0|U6^,  Kairot  a./j.apTi'iuLaTa  ovk  exovra,  quod  est  Latine :  Ideo  et  in-    y^yL  ^j^.  . 
fantea  haptlzamus,  qiiainvis  peccata  non  habentes.'"     JuUan  had  freely  rendered  this :  y.    ^    ^ 

"cwm  no)i  sint  coinquinati  peccato^''  and  had  drawn  the  inference:  "Sanctus  Joan-    ''  ^■'^■f^O**^ 
nes  Constantinopolitanus  negat  esse  in  parvulis  originale  pcccatum."     Augustine    '^^f^^^Jt^  \tCir\t. 
helps  himself  out  of  the  pinch  by  arbitrarily  supplying  propria  to  auapTv/xaTa,  so     ''}'\iUi*\XS^  . 
that  the  idea  of  sin  inherited  from  another  is  not  excluded.     The  Greek  fathers,       ^"Cb. 
however,  did  not  consider  hereditary  corruption  to  be  proper  sin  or  guilt  at  all,  but 
only  defect,  weakness,  or  disease.     In  the  City  of  God,  lib.  xix.  c.  2.3,  he  quotes  a 
passage  from  Porphyry's  eV  Koyluv  cpt\o(ro(pia^   It  is  probable  that  he  read  Plotin, 
and  the  Panarion  of  Epiphanius  or  the  summary  of  it,  in  Greek  (while  the  Church 
History  of  Eusebius  he  knew  only  in  the  translation  of  Rufiuus)./But  in  his  exeget- 
ical  and  other  works  he  very  rarely  consults  the  Septuagint  or  Greek  Testament, 
•and  was  content  with  the  very  imperfect  Itala  or  the  improved  version  of  Jerome. 
The  Benedictine  editors  overestimate  his  knowledge  of  Greek.     He  himself  frankly 
confesses  that  he  knew  very  little  of  it,  De  Trinit.  1.  iii.  Prooem.  ("  Graecaj  hnguae  non 
sit  nobis  tantus  habitus,  ut  talium  rerum  libris  legendis  et  intelligendis  ullo  modo 
reperiamur  idonei "),  and  Contra  literas  Petiliani  (written  in  4t)0),  1.  ii.  c.  38  ("  Et  ego 


1002  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

witli  all  his  extraordinary  familiarity  with  the  Latin  Bible, 
he  made  many  mistakes  in  exposition.  He  was  rather  a 
thinker  than  a  scholar,  and  depended  mainly  on  "his  own  re- 
sources, which  were  always  abundant.' 

quidem  Grsecre  linguae  perparum  assecutus  sum,  et  prope  iiiliil").J^On  the  philo- 
sophical learning  of  Augustine  may  be  compared  Nottrrisson,  1.  c.  ii.  p.  92  fF. 

'  The  following  are  some  of  the  most  intelligent  and  appreciative  estimates  of 
Augustine.  Erasmus  (Ep.  dedicat.  ad  Alfons,  archiep.  Tolet.  1529)  says,  with  an 
ingenious  play  upon  the  name  Aurelius  Augustinus  :  "  Quid  habet  orbis  christianus 
hoc  scriptore  magis  aureum  Tel  augustius  ?  ut  ipsa  vocabula  nequaquam  fortuito, 
sed  numinis  providentia  videantur  indita  viro.  Auro  sapientiae  nihil  pretiosius: 
fulgore  eloquentise  cum  sapientia  conjunctaj  nihil  mirabilius.  .  .  .  Non  arbitror 
ahum  esse  doctorem,  in  quern  opulentus  ille  ac  benignus  Spiritus  dotes  suas  omnes 
largius  effuderit,  quam  in  Augustiaum."  The  great  philosopher  Leibnitz  (Prsefat. 
ad  Theodic.  §  34)  calls  him  "  virum  sane  magnum  et  ingenii  stupendi,"  and  "  vastis- 
simo  ingenio  praeditum."  Dr.  Baur,  without  sympathy  with  his  views,  speaks 
enthusiastically  of  the  man  and  his  genius.  Among  other  things  he  says  (Vorle- 
sungen  Uber  Dogmengeschichte,  i.  i.  p.  61):  "There  is  scarcely  another  theological 
author  so  fertile  and  withal  so  able  as  Augustine.  His  scholarship  was  certainly 
not  equal  to  his  mind ;  yet  even  that  is  sometimes  set  too  low,  when  it  is  asserted 
that  he  had  no  acquaintance  at  aU  with  the  Greek  language ;  for  this  is  incorrect, 
though  he  had  attained  no  great  proficiency  in  Greek."  C.  BixDEiiAira  (a  Lutheran 
divine)  begins  his  thorough  monograph  (vol.  i.  preface)  with  the  well-deserved  eulo- 
gium :  "  St.  Augustine  is  one  of  the  greatest  personages  in  the  church.  He  is  second 
in  importance  to  none  of  the  teachers  who  have  wrought  most  in  the  church  since 
the  apostolic  time ;  and  it  can  well  be  said  that  among  the  church  fathers  the  first 
place  is  due  to  him,  and  in  the  time  of  the  Reformation  a  Luther  alone,  for  fulness 
and  depth  of  thought  and  grandeur  of  character,  may  stand  by  his  side.  He  is  the 
summit  of  the  development  of  the  mediaeval  Western  church ;  from  him  descended 
the  mysticism,  no  less  than  the  scholasticism,  of  the  middle  age ;  he  was  one  of  the 
strongest  pillars  of  the  Roman  Catholicism,  and  from  his  works,  next  to  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  especially  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  the  leaders  of  the  Reformation  drew  most 
of  that  conviction  by  which  a  new  age  was  introduced."  Staudenmaier,  a  Roman 
Cathohc  theologian,  counts  Augustine  among  those  minds  in  which  an  hundred 
others  dwell  (Scotus  Erigena,  i.  p.  274).  The  Roman  Cathohc  philosophers  A. 
GuNTHER  and  Th.  Gangauf,  put  him  on  an  equality  with  the  greatest  philosophers, 
and  discern  in  him  a  providential  personage  endowed  by  the  Spirit  of  God  for  the 
instruction  of  all  ages.  A  striking  characterization  is  that  of  Dr.  Johannes  Huber 
(in  his  instructive  work:  Die  Philosophic  der  Kirchenvater,  Munich,  1859,  p.  312 
sq.):  "Augustine  is  a  unique  phenomenon  in  Christian  history.  No  one  of  the 
other  fathers  has  left  so  luminous  traces  of  his  existence.  Though  we  find  among 
them  many  rich  and  powerful  minds,  yet  we  find  in  none  the  forces  of  personal  char- 
acter, mind,  heart,  and  will,  so  largely  developed  and  so  harmoniously  working.  No 
one  surpasses  liim  in  wealth  of  perceptions  and  dialectical  sharpness  of  thoughts,  in 
depth  and  fervor  of  religious  sensibihty,  in  greatness  of  aims  and  energy  of  action. 


vi^^    ^X't.'C^ift^  ^* 


.'Xl^-    *«,<»-»-^_ 


f.^  ^u/l^   ^L.<^^t^  ^^^  ....jve.^^   ^ 
/l2.tS^f<  ^i^a,.<^-f-  £>t.,t.,^^  ^-<U<^  .4^^<^  ^^t^-^-^-f^^  f'^^VvVy        ^  /-y 


'^^-?^>-», 


tvci-o      It,  t-ce^iJ^  y^s.  '•'""   ^-.-i— 


§    1Y9.      TUE   WORKS   OF   AUGUSTINE.  1003 


§  179.     The  Works  of  Augustine. 

The  numerous  writings  of  Augustine,  the  comj)Osition  of 
which  extended  through  four  and  forty  years,  are  a  mine  of 
Christian  knowledge  and  experience.  They  abound  in  lofty 
ideas,  noble  sentiments,  devout  effusions,  clear  statements  of 
truth,  strong  arguments  against  error,  and  passages  of  fei*vid 
eloquence  and  undying  beauty,  but  also  in  innumerable  repeti- 
tions, fanciful  opinions,  and  playful  conjectures  of  his  uncom- 
monly fertile  brain."     His  style  is  full  of  life  and  vigor  and 

He  therefore  also  marks  the  culmination  of  the  patristic  age,  and  has  been  elevated 
by  the  acknowledgment  of  succeeding  times  as  the  first  and  the  universal  church 
father. — His  whole  character  reminds  us  in  many  respects  of  Paul,  with  whom  he 
has  also  in  common  the  experience  of  being  called  from  manifold  errors  to  the  serv- 
ice of  the  gospel,  and  hke  whom  he  could  boast  that  he  had  labored  in  it  more  abun- 
dantly than  all  the  others.  And  as  Paul  among  the  Apostles  pre-eminently  deter- 
mined the  development  of  Christianity,  and  became,  more  than  all  others,  the  ex- 
pression of  the  Christian  mind,  to  which  men  ever  afterwards  return,  as  often  as  in 
the  life  of  the  church  that  mind  becomes  turbid,  to  draw  from  him,  as  the  purest 
fountain,  a  fresh  understanding  of  the  gospel  doctrine, — so  has  Augustine  turned 
the  Christian  nations  suice  his  time  for  the  most  part  into  his  paths,  and  become 
pre-eminently  their  trainer  and  teacher,  in  the  study  of  whom  they  always  gain  a 
renewal  and  deepening  of  their  Christian  consciousness.  Not  the  middle  age  alone, 
but  the  Reformation  also,  was  ruled  by  him,  and  whatever  to  this  daj  boasts  of  the 
..Christian  spirit,  is  connected  at  least  in  part  with  Augustine."//^ouRRissox,  tke 
kte&t-  Frcnoh  writer-e»-Augnstmo;  whose  work^is  clothed  mth  the  authority  of  the 
Institute  of  France,  assigns  to  the  bishop  of  Hippo  the  first  rank  among  the  masters 
of  human  thought,  alongside  of  Plato  and  Leibnitz,  Thomas  Aquinas  and  Bossuet. 
"Si  une  critique  toujours  respectueuse,  mais  d'une  inviolable  sincerite,  est  une  des 
formes  les  plus  hautes  de  Tadmiration,  j'estime,  au  contraire,  n' avoir  fait  qu'exalter 
ce  grand  coeur,  ce  psychologue  consolant  et  emu,  ce  metaphysicien  subtil  et 
sublime,  en  un  mot,  cet  attachant  et  poetique  genie,  dont  la  place  reste  marquee,  au 
premier  rang,  parmi  le  maitres  de  la  pensee  humaine,  ci  cote  de  Platon  et  de  Des- 
cartes, d'Aristote  et  de  saint  Thomas,  de  Leibniz  et  de  Bossuet."  (La  philosophic 
de  saint  Augustin,  Par.  1866,  tom.  i.  p.  vii.)  Among  English  and  American  writers, 
Dr.  Shedd,  in  the  Introduction  to  his  edition  of  an  old  translation  of  the  Confes- 
sions (1860),  has  furnished  a  truthful  and  forcible  description  of  the  mind  and 
heart  of  St.  Augustine,  as  portrayed  in  this  remarkable  book. 

'  Ellies  Dupin  (Bibliotheque  ecclesiastique,  tom.  iii.  1"  partie,  p.  818)  and 
NouRRissoN  (1.  c.  tom.  ii.  p.  449)  apply  to  Augustine  the  term  magnus  oplnator, 
which  Cicero  used  of  himself.  There  is,  however,  this  important  difference  that 
Augustine,  along  with  his  many  opinions  on  speculative  questions  in  philosophy  and 
theology,  had  very  positive  convictions  in  all  essential  doctrines,  while  Cicero  was  a 
mere  edclectic  in  philosophy. 


^  ^1.  iW^***^^^^ 


1004  THTBD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

ingenious  plays  on  words,  but  deficient  in  purity  and  elegance, 
and  by  no  means  free  from  wearisome  prolixity  and  from 
that  vagdbunda  loquacitas^  witb  wbich  bis  adroit  opponent, 
Julian  of  Eclanum,  cbarged  bim.  He  would  ratber,  as  be 
said,  be  blamed  by  grammarians,  tlian  not  understood  by  tbe 
people;  and  be  bestowed  little  care  upon  bis  style,  tbougb  be 
many  a  time  rises  in  lofty  poetic  fligbt.  He  made  no  point  of 
literary  renown,  but,  impelled  by  love  to  God  and  to  tbe 
cburcb,  be  wrote  from  tbe  fulness  of  bis  mind  and  beart.  Tbe 
writings  before  bis  conversion,  a  treatise  on  tbe  Beautiful  (De 
Pulcbro  et  Apto),  tbe  orations  and  eulogies  wbicb  be  delivered 
as  rbetorician  at  Cartbage,  Rome,  and  Milan,  are  lost.  Tbe 
professor  of  eloquence,  tbe  beatben  pbilosopber,  tbe  Manicb^an 
beretic,  tbe  sceptic  and  freetbinker,  are  known  to  us  only  from 
bis  regrets  and  recantations  in  tbe  Confessions  and  otber 
works.  His  literary  career  for  ns  commences  in  bis  pious 
retreat  at  Cassiciacum  wbere  be  prepared  bimself  for  a  public 
profession  of  bis  faitb.  He  appears  first,  in  tbe  works  com- 
posed at  Cassiciacum,  Rome,  and  near  Tagaste,  as  a  Cbristian 
pbilosopber,  after  bis  consecration  to  tbe  priestbood  as  a 
tbeologian.  Yet  even  in  bis  tbeological  works  be  everywbere 
manifests  tbe  metapbysical  and  speculative  bent  of  bis  mind. 
He  never  abandoned  or  depreciated  reason,  be  only  subordi- 
nated it  to  faitb  and  made  it  subservient  to  tbe  defence  of 
revealed  trutb.  Faitb  is  tbe  pioneer  of  reason,  and  discovers 
tbe  territory  wbicb  reason  explores. 

Tbe  following  is  a  classified  view  of  bis  most  important 
works,  tbe  contents  of  tbe  most  of  wbicb  we  bave  already 
noticed  in  former  sections.' 

*  PossiDius  counts  in  all,  including  sermons  and  letters,  one  thousand  and  thirty 
writings  of  Augustine.  On  these  see,  above  all,  his  Retractations,  Tvhere  he  himself 
reviews  ninety-three  of  his  works  (embracing  two  hundred  and  thirty-two  books,  see 
ii.  B*/),  in  chronological  order ;  in  the  first  book  those  which  he  wrote  while  a  lay- 
man and  presbyter,  in  the  second  those  which  he  wrote  when  a  bishop.  Also  the 
extended  chronological  index  in  Schoxemann's  Biblioth.  historico-literaria  Patrum 
Latinorum,  vol.  ii.  (Lips.  1794),  p.  340  spq.  (reprinted  in  the  supplemental  volume, 
xii.,  of  Migne's  ed.  of  the  Opera,  p.  24  sqq.) ;  and  other  systematic  and  alphabetical 
lists  in  the  eleventh  volume  of  the  Bened^ed.  (p.  494  sqq.,  ed.  Yenet.),  and  in  Migne, 
tom.  xi. 


Mta, 


0u^u.Mic^ 


/, 


-uii^  /?s:«r-^^'«  ^^ 


§  179.      THE   WORKS   OF   ATTGUSTINE.  1005 

I.  AuTOBioGKAPnicAL  wopks.  To  these  belong  the  Confes- 
sions and  the  Retractations;  the  former  acknowledging  his 
sins,  the  latter  liis  theoretical  errors.  In  the  one  he  subjects 
his  hfe,  in  the  other  his  writings,  to  close  criticism  ;  and  these 
productions  therefore  furnish  the  best  standard  for  judging  of 
his  entire  labors.' 

The  Confessions  are  the  most  profitable,  at  least  the  most 
edifying,  -product  of  his  pen ;  indeed,  we  maj  no  doubt  say, 
the  most  edifying  book  iii  all  the  patristic  literature.  They 
were  accordingly  the  .most  read  even  dm'ing  his  lifetime,*  and 
they  have  been  the  most  frequently  published  since.'  /A  more 

*  For  this  reason  the  "Benedictine  editors  have  placed  the  Retractations  and  the 
Confessions  at  the  head  of  his  works. 

'^  He  himself  says  of  them,  Eetract.  1.  ii.  c.  6 :  "  Multis  fratribus  eos  [Confes- 
sionum  libros  tredecim]  multum  placuisse  et  placere  scio."  Comp.  De  dono  perse- 
verantia?,  c.  20 :  "  Quid  autem  meorum  opusculorum  frequentius  et  delectabihus 
innotescere  potuit  quam  libri  Confessionum  meanim?"  Comp.  Ep.  231  Dario 
comiti. 

'  ScHoNEMANN  (in  the  supplemental  volume  of  Migne's  ed.  of  Augustine,  p.  134 
sqq.)  cites  a  multitude  of  separate  editions  of  the  Confessions  in  Latin,  Italian,  Span- 
ish, Portuguese,  French,  English,  and  German,  from  a.  d.  1475  to  1776.     Siace  that         /Mr^f^f^y 
time  several  new  editions  have  been  added.     There  are  German  translations  by  H.      "*  5~     Ji 
Kautz  (R.  C,  Amsberg,  1840),  G.  Rapp  (Prot,  2d  ed.,  Stuttg.,  1847^  and  others.        "™:~i^  '■ 
The  best  EngUsh  edition  is  that  of  Dr.  E.  B.  Pusey  :  The  Confessions  of  S.  Augus-    ^><ri^M**^f*y  ^^ 
tine,  Oxford  (first  in  1838,  as  the  first  volume  in  the  Oxf.  Library  of  the  Fathers,  /  fT  ^ 

together  with  an  edition  of  the  Latia  original).    It  is,  however,  as  Dr.  Pusey  says,  "  ft ' 

only  a  revision  of  the  translation  of  Rev.  W.  Watts,  D. D.,  London,  1650,  accom-  \y^ii>  f  9^0 
panied  with  a  long  preface  (pp.  i-xxxv)  and  elucidations  from  Augustine's  works  in 
notes  and  at  the  end  (pp.  314-346).  The  edition  of  Dr.  W.  G.  T.  Shedd,  Andover, 
1860,  is,  as  he  says,  "a  reprint  of  an  old  translation  by  an  author  unknown  to  the 
editor,  which  was  repubhshed  in  Boston  in  1843."  A  cursory  comparison  shows, 
that  this  anonymous  Boston  reprint  agrees  almost  word  for  word  with  Pusey's  revi- 
sion of  Watts,  omitting  his  introduction  and  all  his  notes.  ^  Dr.  Shedd  has,  however, 
added  an  excellent  original  introduction,  in  which  he  clearly  and  vigorously  charac- 
terizes the  Confessions  and  draws  a  comparison  between  them  and  the  Confessions 
of  Rousseau.  He  calls  the  former  (p.  xxvii)  not  inaptly  the  best  commentary  yet 
written  upon  the  seventh  and  eighth  chapters  of  Romans.  "  That  quickening  of  the 
human  spirit,  which  puts  it  again  into  vital  and  sensitive  relations  to  the  holy  and 
eternal ;  that  illumination  of  the  mmd,  whereby  it  is  enabled  to  perceive  with  clear- 
ness the  real  nature  of  truth  and  righteousness ;  that  empoweiing  of  the  will,  to  the 
conflict  of  victory — the  entire  process  of  restoring  the  Divine  image  in  the  soul  of 
man — is  delineated  in  this  book,  with  a  vividness  and  reality  never  exceeded  by  the 
iininspired  mind."  .  .  .  "It  is  the  life  of  God  in  the  soul  of  a  strong  man,  rush- 
ing and  rippling  with  the  freedom  of  the  life  of  nature.     He  who  watches  can  almost 


1006  THIKD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

sincere  and  more  earnest  book  was  never  written.  The  histor- 
ical part,  to  the  tenth  book,  is  one  of  the  devotional  classics  of 
all  creeds,  and  second  in  popularity  only  to  the  "  Imitation  of 
Christ,"  by  Thomas  a  Kempis,  and  Bunyan's  "Pilgrim's 
Progress."  Certainly  no  autobiography  is  superior  to  it  in 
true  humility,  spiritual  depth,  and  universal  interest.  Augus- 
tine's experience,  as  a  heathen  sensualist,  a  Manichsean  heretic, 
an  anxious  inquirer,  a  sincere  penitent,  and  a  grateful  convert, 
is  reflected  in  every  human  soul  that  struggles  through  the 
temptations  of  nature  and  the  labyrinth  of  error  to  the  know- 
ledge of  truth  and  the  beauty  of  holiness,  and  after  many  sighs 
and  tears  finds  rest  and  peace  in  the  arms  of  a  merciful  Sav- 
iour. Rousseau's  "Confessions,"  and  Goethe's  "Truth  and 
Poetry,"  though  written  in  a  radically  different  spirit,  may  be 
compared  Math  Augustine's  Confessions  as  works  of  rare  genius 
and  of  absorbing  interest,  but,  by  attempting  to  exalt  human 
nature  in  its  unsanctified  state,  they  tend  as  much  to  expose 
its  vanity  and  weakness,  as  the  work  of  the  bishop  of  Hippo, 
being  written  with  a  single  eye  to  the  glory  of  God,  raises 
man  from  the  dust  of  repentance  to  a  new  and  imperishable 
life  of  the  Spirit.' 

Augustine  composed  the  Confessions  about  the  year  400. 
Tlie  first  ten  books  contain,  in  the  form  of  a  continuous  prayer 
and  confession  before  God,  a  general  sketch  of  his  earlier  life, 
of  his  conversion,  and  of  his  return  to  Africa  in  the  thirty- 
fourth  year  of  his  age.  The  salient  points  in  these  books  are 
the  engaging  history  of  his  conversion  in  Milan,  and  the  story 
of  the  last  days  of  his  noble  mother  in  Ostia,  spent  as  it  were 
at  the  very  gate  of  heaven  and  in  full  assurance  of  a  blessed 
reunion  at  the  throne  of  glory.  The  last  three  books  (and  a 
part  of  the  tenth)  are  devoted  to  speculative  philosophy; 
they  treat,  partly  in  tacit  opposition  to  Manichjeisra,  of  the 

see  the  growth ;  he  who  listens  can  hear  the  perpetual  motion ;  and  he  who  is  in 
sympathy  will  be  swept  along." 

'  NouRRissoN  (1.  c.  tom.  i.  p.  19)  calls  the  Confessions  "cet  ouvrage  unique, 
souvent  imit6,  toujours  parodie,  ou  il  s'accuse,  se  condamne  et  s'humilie,  pri^re 
^ardente,  r^cit  entrainant,  m^taphysique  incomparable,  histoire  de  tout  un  monde 
qui  se  reflate  dans  I'histoire  d'une  &me."  ^^ 

r 


§    179.      THE   WORKS   OF   AUGUSTINE.  1007 

metapliysical  questions  of  the  possibility  of  knowing  God,  and 
the  nature  of  time  and  space ;  and  they  give  an  interpretation 
of  the  Mosaic  cosmogony  in  the  style  of  the  typical  allegorical 
exegesis  usual  with  the  fathers,  but  foreign  to  our  age';  they 
are  therefore  of  little  value  to  the  general  reader,  except  as 
showing  that  even  abstract  metaphysical  subjects  may  be 
devotionally  treated. 

The  Ketractations  were  produced  in  the  evening  of  his  life 
(427),  when,  mindful  of  the  proverb:  "In  the  multitude  of 
words  there  wanteth  not  sin,"  '  and  remembering  that  we  must 
give  account  for  every  idle  word,'  he  judged  himself,  that  he 
might  not  be  judged.^  He  revised  in  chronological  order  the 
numerous  works  he  had  written  before  and  during  his  episco- 
pate, and  retracted  or  corrected  whatever  in  them  seemed  to 
his  riper  knowledge  false  or  obscure.  In  all  essential  points, 
nevertheless,  his  theological  system  remained  the  same  from 
his  conversion  to  this  time.  The  Retractations  give  beautiful 
evidence  of  his  love  o^  truth,  his  conscientiousness,  and  his  hu- 
mility.* 

To  this  same  class  should  be  added  the  Letters  of  Augus- 
tine, of  which  the  Benedictine  editors,  in  their  second  volume, 
give  two  hundred  and  seventy  (including  letters  to  Augustine) 
in  chronological  order  from  a.  d.  386  to  a,  d.  429.  These  let- 
ters treat,  sometimes  very  minutely,  of  all  the  important  ques- 
tions of  his  time,  and  give  us  an  insight  of  his  cares,  his  official 
fidelity,  his  large  heart,  and  his  effort  to  become,  like  Paul,  all 
things  to  all  men. 

When  the  questions  of  friends  and  pupils  accunmlated,  he 
answered  them  in  special  works ;  and  in  this  way  he  produced 
various  collections  of  Qugestiones  and  Eesponsiones,  dogmat- 
ical, exegetical,  and  miscellaneous  (a.  d.  390,  397,  &c.). 


'  Prov.  X.  19.  This  verse  (ex  multiloquio  non  effugies  peccatum)  the  Semi- 
Pelagian  Gennadius  (De  viris  illustr.  sub  Aug.)  apphes  against  Augustine  in  excuse 
for  his  erroneous  doctrines  of  freedom  and  predestination. 

'^  Matt.  xii.  36. 

^  1  Cor.  xi.  31.     Comp.  his  Prologus  to  the  two  books  of  Retractationes. 

*  J.  MoRELL  Mackexzik  (in  W.  Smith's  Dictionary  of  Greek  and  Roman  Biog- 
raphy and  Mythology,  toI.  i.  p.  422)  happily  calls  the  Retractations  of  Augustine 


1008  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

II.  PniLosoPHicAi  treatises,  in  dialogue;  almost  all  com- 
posed in  his,  earlier  life;  eitlier  during  his  residence  on  the 
country-seat  Cassiciacum  in  the  vicinity  of  Milan,  where  he 
spent  half  a  year  before  his  baptism  in  instructive  and  stimu- 
lating conversation  in  a  sort  of  academy  or  Christian  Platonic 
banquet  with  Monica,  his  son  Adeodatus,  his  brother  Navi- 
gius,  his  friend  Alypius,  and  some  cousins  and  pupils ;  or  dur- 
ing his  second  residence  in  Eome ;  or  soon  after  his  return  to 
Africa.' 

To  this  class  belong  the  works:  Contra  Academicos  libri 
tres  (386),  in  which  he  combats  the  skepticism  and  probabilism 
of  the  New  Academy, — the  doctrine  that  man  can  never  reach 
the  truth,  but  can  at  best  attain  only  probability ;  De  vita 
beata  (386),  in  which  he  makes  true  blessedness  to  consist  in 
the  perfect  knowledge  of  God ;  De  ordine, — on  the  relation  of 
evil  to  the  divine  order  of  the  workP  (386) ;  Soliloquia  (387), 
communings  with  his  own  soul  concerning  God,  the  higliest 
good,  the  knowledge  of  truth,  and  immortality ;  De  immortali- 
tate  animse  (387),  a  continuation  of  the  Soliloquies ;  De  quan- 
titate  animse  (387),  discussing  sundry  questions  of  the  size,  the 
origin,  the  incorporeity  of  the  soul ;  De  musica  libri  vi  (387- 
389) ;  De  magistro  (389),  in  which,  in  a  dialogue  with  his  son 
Adeodatus,  a  pious  and  promising,  but  precocious  youth,  who 
died  soon  after  his  return  to  Africa  (389),  he  treats  on  the  im- 
portance and  virtue  of  the  word  of  God,  and  on  Christ  as  the 
infallible  Master.^     To  these  may  be  added  the  later  work,  De 

"  one  of  the  noblest  sacrifices  ever  laid  upon  the  altar  of  truth  by  a  majestic  intellect 
acting  in  obedience  to  the  purest  conscientiousness." 

*  Li  torn.  i.  of  the  ed.  Bened.,  immediately  after  the  Retractationes  and  Confes- 
siones,  and  at  the  close  of  the  volimie.  On  these  philosophical  writings,  see  Bru- 
cker:  Historia  critica  philosophiae,  Lips.  1766,  torn.  iii.  pp.  485-507;  H.  Ritter: 
Geschichte  der  Philosophic,  vol.  vi.  p.  153  £f. ;  Bi^tdemaxx,  1.  c.  p.  282  sqq. ;  Hcbkr, 
I.  c.  p.  242  sqq. ;  Gangauf,  1.  c.  p.  25  sqq.,  and  Nourrisox,  1.  c.  ch.  i.  and  ii. 
Nourrison  makes  the  just  remark  (i.  p.  53):  "Si  la  philosophie  est  la  recherche  de 
la  verite,  jamais  sans  doute  il  ne  s'est  rencontre  une  time  plus  philosophe  que  celle 
de  saint  Augustin.  Car  jamais  arae  n'a  supporte  avec  plus  d'impatience  les  anxietes 
du  doute  et  n'a  fait  plus  d'efforts  pour  dissiper  les  fantumes  de  I'erreur." 

^  Or  on  the  question :  "  Utrum  omnia  bona  et  mala  divina)  providentiie  ordo 
contineat  ?  "     Comp.  Retract,  i.  3. 

*  Augustine,  in  his  Confessions  (1.  ix.  c.  6),  expresses  himself  in  this  touching 


§   179.       THE   WORKS   OF   AUGUSTINE.  1009 

anima  et  ejus  origine  (-119).  Other  philosopliical  works  on 
grammar,  dialectics  (or  ars  hene  disputand'i),  rhetoric,  geome- 
try, and  arithmetic,  are  lost.' 

These  works  exhibit  as  yet  little  that  is  specifically  Chris- 
tian and  churchly ;  but  they  show  a  Platonism  seized  and  con- 
secrated by  the  spirit  of  Christianity,  full  of  high  thoughts, 
ideal  views,  and  discriminating  argument.  They  were  design- 
ed to  present  the  different  stages  of  human  thought  by  which 
he  himself  had  reached  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  and  to 
serve  others  as  stej^s  to  the  sanctuary.  They  form  an  elemen- 
tary introduction  to  his  theology.  He  afterwards,  in  his  Re- 
tractations, withdrew  many  things  contained  in  them,  like  the 
Platonic  view  of  the  pre-existence  of  the  soul,  and  the  Platonic 
idea  that  the  acquisition  of  knowledge  is  a  recollection  or 
excavation  of  the  knowledge  hidden  in  the  mind.'^  The  phil- 
osopher in  him   afterwards   yielded  more   and  more   to  the 

way  about  this  son  of  his  illicit  love:  "We  took  with  us  [on  returning  from  the 
country  to  Milan  to  receive  the  sacrament  of  baptism]  also  the  boy  Adeodatus,  the 
son  of  my  carnal  sin.  Thou  hadst  formed  him  well.  He  was  but  just  fifteen  years 
old,  and  he  was  superior  in  mind  to  many  grave  and  learned  men.  I  acknowledge 
Thy  gifts,  0  Lord,  my  God,  who  Greatest  all,  and  who  canst  reform  our  deformities ; 
for  I  had  no  part  in  that  boy  but  sin.  And  when  we  brought  him  up  in  Thy  nur- 
ture. Thou,  only  Thou,  didst  prompt  us  to  it ;  I  acknowledge  Thy  gifts.  There  is 
my  book  entitled,  De  Magistro ;  he  speaks  with  me  there.  Thou  knowest  that  all 
things  there  put  into  his  mouth  were  in  his  mind  when  he  was  sixteen  years  of  age. 
That  maturity  of  mind  was  a  terror  to  me ;  and  who  but  Thou  is  the  artificer  of  such 
wonders  ?  Soon  Thou  didst  take  his  life  from  the  earth ;  and  I  think  more  quietly 
of  him  now,  fearing  no  more  for  his  boyhood,  nor  his  youth,  nor  his  whole  life. 
We  took  him  to  ourselves  as  one  of  the  same  age  in  Thy  grace,  to  be  trained  in  Thy 
nurture ;  and  we  were  baptized  together ;  and  all  trouble  about  the  past  fled  from 
us." 

*  The  books  on  grammar,  dialectics,  rhetoric,  and  the  ten  Categories  of  Aristo- 
tle, in  the  Appendix  to  the  first  volume  of  the  Bened.  ed.,  are  spurious.  For  the 
genuine  works  of  Augustine  on  these  subjects  were  written  in  a  diiferent  form  (the 
dialogue)  and  for  a  higher  purpose,  and  were  lost  in  his  own  day.  Comp.  Retract, 
i.  c.  6.  In  spite  of  this,  Pr^stl  (Geschichte  der  Logik  im  Abendlande,  pp.  665-674, 
cited  by  Hubee,  1.  c.  p.  240)  has  advocated  the  genuineness  of  the  Principia  dialec- 
tics, and  HuBER  inclines  to  agree.  Gangauf,  1.  c.  p.  5,  and  Nourrisson,  i.  p.  37, 
consider  them  spurious. 

*  'H  txab-nais  ouK  &\\o  Ti  ^  a.vap.vt](ns.  On  this  Plato,  in  the  Phsedo,  as  is  well 
known,  rests  his  doctrine  of  pre-existence.  Augustine  was  at  first  in  favor  of  the 
idea,  Solil.  ii.  20,  n.  35  ;  afterwards  he  rejected  it,  Retract,  i.  4,  §  4. 

VOL.  II. — 64 


1010  THIRD   PEKIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

theologian,  and  his  views  became  more  positive  and  empirical, 
though  in  some  cases  narrower  also  and  more  exclusive.  Yet 
he  could  never  cease  to  philosophize,  and  even  his  later  works, 
especially  De  Trinitate  and  De  Civitate  Dei,  are  full  of  pro- 
found speculations.  Before  his  conversion  he  followed  a  par- 
ticular system  of  philosophy,  first  the  Manichsean,  then  the 
Platonic ;  after  his  conversion  he  embraced  the  Christian  phi- 
losophy, which  is  based  on  the  divine  revelation  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  is  the  handmaid  of  theology  and  religion ;  but  at  the 
same  time  he  prepared  the  way  for  the  catholic  ecclesiastical 
philosophy,  which  rests  on  the  authority  of  the  church,  and  be- 
came complete  in  the  scholasticism  of  the  middle  age. 

In  the  history  of  philosophy  he  deserves  a  place  in  the 
highest  rank,  and  has  done  greater  service  to  the  science  of 
sciences  than  any  other  father,  Clement  of  Alexandria  and 
Origen  not  excepted.  He  attacked  and  refuted  the  pagan 
philosophy  as  pantheistic  or  dualistic  at  heart ;  be  shook  the 
superstitions  of  astrology  and  magic ;  he  expelled  from  phil- 
osophy the  doctrine  of  emanation,  and  the  idea  that  God  is  the 
soul  of  the  world ;  he  substantially  advanced  psychology ;  he 
solved  the  question  of  the  origin  and  the  nature  of  evil  more 
nearly  than  any  of  his  predecessors,  and  as  nearly  as  most  of 
his  successors ;  he  was  the  first  to  investigate  thoroughly  the 
relation  of  divine  omnipotence  and  omniscience  to  human  free- 
dom, and  to  construct  a  theodicy ;  in  short,  he  is  properly  the 
founder  of  a  Christian  philosophy,  and  not  only  divided  with 
Aristotle  the  empire  of  the  mediaeval  scholasticism,  but  fur- 
nished also  living  germs  for  new  systems  of  philosophy,  and 
will  always  be  consulted  in  the  speculative  establishment  of 
Christian  doctrines. 

III.  Apologetic  works  against  Pagans  and  Jews.  Among 
these  the  twenty-two  books,  De  Civitate  Dei,  are  still  well 
worth  reading.  They  form  the  deepest  and  richest  apologetic 
work  of  antiquity ;  begun  in  413,  after  the  occupation  of  Rome 
by  the  Gothic  king  Alaric,  finished  in  426,  and  often  separately 
published.  They  condense  his  entire  theory  of  the  world  and 
of  man,  and  are  the  first  attempt  at  a  comprehensive  philoso- 


§   179.      THE   WORKS   OF   AUGUSTINE.  1011 

phy  of  universal  Instoiy  under  the  dualistic  view  of  two  antag- 
onistic currents  or  organized  forces,  a  kingdom  of  this  world 
which  is  doomed  to  final  destruction,  and  a  kingdom  of  God 
which  will  last  forever.' 

TV.  Religious-Tiieological  works  of  a  general  nature  (in 
part  anti-Manichaean) :  De  utilitate  credendi,  against  the 
Gnostic  exaltation  of  knowledge  (392) ;  De  fide  et  symboio,  a 
discourse  which,  though  only  presbyter,  he  delivered  on  the 
Apostles'  Creed  before  the  council  at  Hippo  at  the  request  of 
the  bishops  in  393  ;  De  doctrina  Cliristiana  iv  libri  (397 ;  the 
fourth  book  added  in  426),  a  compend  of  exegetical  theology 
for  instruction  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  according 
to  the  analogy  of  the  faith ;  De  catechizandis  rudibus,  likewise 
for  catechetical  purposes  (400) ;  Enchiridion,  or  De  fide,  spe  et 
caritate,  a  brief  compend  of  the  doctrine  of  faith  and  morals, 
which  he  wrote  in  421,  or  later,  at  the  request  of  Laurentius ; 
hence  also  called  Manuale  ad  Laurentium. 

Y.  Polemic-Theological  works.  These  are  the  most 
copious  sources  of  the  history  of  doctrine.  The  heresies  col- 
lectively are  reviewed  in  the  book  De  hseresibus  ad  Quodvult- 
deum,  written  between  428  and  430  to  a  friend  and  deacon  in 
Carthage,  and  giving  a  survey  of  eighty-eight  heresies,  from 
the  Simonians  to  the  Pelagians,*  In  the  work  De  vera  reli- 
gione  (390)  Augustine  proposed  to  show  that  the  true  religion 
is  to  be  found  not  with  the  heretics  and  schismatics,  but  only 
in  the  catholic  church  of  that  time. 

^  In  the  Bened.  ed.  torn.  vii.  Comp.  Retract,  ii.  43,  and  above,  §  12.  The  City 
of  God  and  the  Confessions  are  the  only  writings  of  Augustine  which  Gibbon  thought 
good  to  read  (chap.  xxxiS.).  Huber  (1.  c.  p.  315)  says:  "Augustine's  philosophy 
of  history,  as  he  presents  it  in  his  Civitas  Dei,  has  remained  to  this  hour  the  stand- 
ard philosophy  of  history  for  the  church  orthodoxy,  the  bounds  of  which  this  ortho- 
doxy, unable  to  perceive  in  the  motions  of  the  modem  spirit  the  fresh  morning  air 
of  a  higher  day  of  history,  is  scarcely  able  to  transcend."  Noureisson  devotes  a 
special  chapter  to  the  consideration  of  the  two  cities  of  Augustine,  the  City  of  the 
World  and  the  City  of  God  (tom.  ii.  43-88).  Compare  also  the  Introduction  to 
Saisset's  Traduction  de  la  Cite  de  Dieu,  Par.  1855.  /" 

*  This  work  is  also  incorporated  in  the  Corpus  hiKreseologicum  of  Fr.  Oehlee, 
tom.  i.  pp.  192-225. 


1012  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

The 'Other  controversial  works  are  directed  against  the  par- 
ticular heresies  of  Manichagism,  Donatism,  Arianism,  Pelagian- 
ism,  and  Semi-Pelagianism.  Augustine,  with  all  the  firmness 
of  his  convictions,  was  free  from  personal  antijDathy,  and  used 
the  pen  of  controversy  in  the  genuine  Christian  spirit,  fortiter 
'hi  re,  stimiter  in  inodo.  He  understood  Paul's  okTfhevuv  Iv 
aycLvrj,  and  forms  in  this  respect  a  pleasing  contrast  to  Jerome, 
who  probably  had  by  nature  no  more  fiery  temperament  than 
he,  but  was  less  able  to  control  it.  "Let  those,"  he  very 
beautifully  says  to  the  Manichseans,  "  burn  with  hatred  against 
you,  who  do  not  know  how  much  pains  it  costs  to  find  the 
truth,  how  hard  it  is  to  guard  against  error ; — but  I,  who  after 
so  great  and  long  wavering  came  to  know  the  truth,  must  bear 
myself  towards  you  with  the  same  patience  which  my  fellow- 
believers  showed  towards  me  while  I  was  wanderiug  in  blind 
madness  in  your  opinions."  * 

1,  The  ANTi-MAisricH^AN  works  date  mostly  from  his  earlier 
life,  and  in  time  and  matter  follow  immediately  upon  his  phil- 
osophical writings.'^  In  them  he  afterwards  found  most  to 
retract,  because  he  advocated  the  freedom  of  the  will  against 
the  Manichseau  fatalism.  The  most  important  are :  De  mori- 
bus  ecclesioe  catholics,  et  de  moribus  Manichssorum,  two  books 
(written  during  his  second  residence  in  Kome,  388) ;  De  vera 
religione  (390) ;  Unde  malum,  et  de  libero  arbitrio,  usually 
simply  De  libero  arbitrio,  in  three  books,  against  the  Mani- 
chsean  doctrine  of  evil  as  a  substance,  and  as  having  its  seat 
in  matter  instead  of  free  will  (begun  in  388,  finislied  in  395) ; 
De  Genesi  contra  Manichseos,  a  defence  of  the  biblical  doctrine 
of  creation  (389) ;  De  duabus  animabus,  against  the  psycho- 
logical dualism  of  the  Manichseans  (392) ;  Disputatio  contra 
Fortunatum  (a  triumphant  refutation  of  thifi  Manichsean  priest 
in  Hi^^po  in  August,  392) ;  Contra  Epistolam  Manichsei  quam 
vocant  fundamenti  (397) ;  Contra  Faustum  Manichasum,  in 
thirty-three  books  (400-4:01) ;  De  natura  boni  (404),  &c. 

These  works  treat  of  the  origin  of  evil ;  of  free  will ;  of  the 

'  Comp.  Contra  Epist.  Manichaei  quam  vocant  fundamenti,  1.  i.  2. 
*  The  eai'liest  anti-Maniclia;an  writings  (De  libero  arbitrio ;  De  moribus  eccl.  cath. 
et  de  moribus  Mauicb.)  are  in  tom.  i.  ed.  Bened. ;  the  latter  in  tom.  viii. 


§   179.      THE   WOKKS   OF    AUGUSTINE.  1013 

harmony  of  tlie  Old  and  New  Testaments,  and  of  revelation 
and  nature ;  of  creation  out  of  nothing,  in  opposition'  to  dual- 
ism and  hjlozoism ;  of  the  supremacy  of  faith  over  knowledge ; 
of  the  authority  of  the  Scriptm'es  and  the  church ;  of  the  true 
and  the  false  asceticism,  and  other  disputed  points ;  and  they 
are  the  chief  source  of  our  knowledge  of  the  Manichasan  Gnos- 
ticism and  of  the  arguments  against  it.  Having  himself  be- 
longed for  nine  years  to-  this  sect,  Augustine  was  the  better 
fitted  for  the  task  of  refuting  it,  as  Paul  was  peculiarly  pre- 
pared for  the  confutation  of  the  Pharisaic  Judaism.  His  doc- 
trine of  the  nature  of  evil  is  particularly  valuable.  He  has 
triumphantly  demonstrated  for  all  time,  that  evil  is  not  a  cor- 
poreal thing,  nor  in  any  way  substantial,  but  a  product  of  the 
free  will  of  the  creature,  a  perversion  of  substance  in  itself 
good,  a  corruption  of  the  nature  created  by  God. 

2.  Against  the  Peiscillianists,  a  sect  in  Spain  built  on 
Manichesan  principles,  are  directed  the  book  Ad  Paulum  Oro- 
sium  contra  Priscillianistas  et  Origenistas  (411) ; '  the  book 
Contra  meudacium,  addressed  to  Consentius  (420) ;  and  in 
part  the  190tli  Epistle  (alias  Ep.  157),  to  the  bishop  Optatus, 
on  the  origin  of  the  soul  (418),  and  two  other  letters,  in  which 
he  refutes  erroneous  views  on  the  nature  of  the  soul,  the  lim- 
itation of  future  punishments,  and  the  lawfulness  of  fraud  for 
supposed  good  purposes. 

3.  The  AJSTTi-DoNATisTic  works,  composed  between  the 
years  393  and  420,  argue  against  separatism,  and  contain 
Augustine's  doctrine  of  the  church  and  church-discipline,  and 
of  the  sacraments.  To  these  belong :  Psalmus  contra  partem 
Donati  (a.  d.  393),  a  polemic  popular  song  without  regular 
metre,  intended  to  offset  the  songs  of  the  Donatists ;  Contra 
epistolam  Parmeniani,  written  in  400  against  the  Carthaginian 
bishop  of  the  Donatists,  the  successor  of  Donatus ;  De  baptismo 
contra  Donatistas,  in  favor  of  the  validity  of  heretical  baptism 
(400) ;  Contra  literas  Petiliani  (about  400),  against  the  view 
of  Cyprian  and  the  Donatists,  that  the  efficacy  of  the  sacra- 
ments depends  on  the  personal  worthiness  and  the  ecclesiastical 

'  Tom.  viii.  p.  611  sqq. 


1014  THIED   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

status  of  tne  officiating  priest ;  Ad  Catliolicos  Epistola  contra 
Donatistas,  vnlgo  De  uuitate  ecclesise  (402) ;  Contra  Cresco- 
niiim  grammaticum  Donatistam  (406);  Breviculus  collationis 
cum  Donatistis,  a  short  account  of  the  three-days'  religious 
conference  with  the  Donatists  (411) ;  De  correctione  Donatis- 
tarum  (417) ;  Contra  Gaudentium,  Donat.  Episcopum,  the  last 
anti-Donatistic  work  (420),' 

4.  The  anti-Arian  works  have  to  do  with  the  deity  of 
Christ  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  with  the  Holy  Trinity.  By 
far  the  most  important  of  these  are  the  fifteen  books  De  Trini- 
tate  (400-416) ; — the  most  profound  and  discriminating  pro- 
duction of  the  ancient  church  on  the  Trinity,  in  no  respect 
inferior  to  the  kindred  works  of  Athanasius  and  the  two  Greg- 
ories,  and  for  centuries  final  to  the  dogma.^  This  may  also  be 
counted  among  the  positive  didactic  works,  for  it  is  not  directly 
controversial.  The  CoUatio  cum  Maximino  Ariano,  an  obscure 
babbler,  belongs  to  the  year  428. 

5.  The  numerous  anti-Pelagian  works  of  Augustine  are 
his  most  influential  and  most  valuable.  They  were  written 
between  the  years  412  and  429.  In  them  Augustine,  in  his 
intellectual  and  spiritual  prime,  develoj)es  his  system  of 
anthropology  and  soteriology,  and  most  nearly  approaches 
the  position  of  evangelical  Protestantism :  On  the  Guilt  and 
the  Remission  of  Sins,  and  Infant  Baptism  (412) ;  On  the 
Spirit  and  the  Letter  (413) ;  On  Nature  and  Grace  (415) ;  On 
the  Acts  of  Pelagius  (417) ;  On  the  Grace  of  Chi"ist,  and  Orig- 
inal Sin  (418);  On  Marriage  and  Concupiscence  (419);  On 
Grace  and  Free  Will  (426) ;  On  Discipline  and  Grace  (427) ; 
Against  Julian  of  Eclanum  (two  large  works,  written  between 
421  and  429,  the  second  unfinished,  and  hence  called  Opus 
imperfectum) ;  On  the  Predestination  of  the  Saints  (428) ;  On 
the  Gift  of  Perseverance  (429) ;  &c.' 

*  All  these  in  torn.  ix.     Comp.  above,  §§  69  and  VO. 

"^  Tom.  viii.  ed.  Bened.  p.  749  sqq.  Comp.  §  131,  above.  The  work  was  stolen 
from  him  by  some  impatient  friends  before  revision,  and  before  the  completion  of 
the  twelfth  book,  so  that  he  became  much  discouraged,  and  coi'ld  only  be  moved  to 
finish  it  by  urgent  entreaties. 

'  Opera,  tom.  x.,  in  two  parts,  with  an  Appendix.  The  same  in  Migne.  Comp. 
§g  146-160,  above. 


§    179.      THE   WORKS   OF   AUGUSTINE.  1015 

YI.  ExEGETicAL  works.  The  best  of  these  are :  De  Genesi 
ad  literam  (The  Genesis  word  for  word),  in  twelve  books,  an 
extended  exposition  of  the  first  three  chapters  of  Genesis,  par- 
ticularly the  history  of  the  creation  literally  interpreted, 
though  with  many  mystical  and  allegorical  interpretations  also 
(written  between  401  and  415) ; '  Enarrationes  in  Psalmos 
(mostly  sermons) ;  *  the  hundi'ed  and  twenty-four  Homilies  on 
the  Gospel  of  John  (416  and  417) ; '  the  ten  Homilies  on  the 
First  Epistle  of  John  (417) ;  the  Exposition  of  the  Sennon  on 
the  Mount  (393) ;  the  Hannony  of  the  Gospels  (De  consensu 
evangelistarum,  400) ;  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  (394) ;  and 
the  unfinished  commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Eomans.'' 

Augustine  deals  more  in  lively,  profound,  and  edifying 
thoughts  on  the  Scriptures  than  in  proper  grammatical  and 
historical  exposition,  for  which  neither  he  nor  his  readers  had 
the  necessary  linguistic  knowledge,  disposition,  or  taste.  He 
grounded  his  theology  less  upon  exegesis  than  upon  his  Chris- 
tian and  churchly  mmd,  saturated  with  Scriptural  truths. 

YII.  Ethical  or  Peacticai.  and  Ascetic  works.  Among 
these  belong  three  hundred  and  ninety-six  Sermones  (mostly 
very  short)  de  Scriptiiris  (on  texts  of  Scripture),  de  tempore 
(festival  sermons),  de  Sanctis  (in  memory  of  apostles,  martyrs, 
and  saints),  and  de  diversis  (on  various  occasions),  some  of 
them  dictated  by  Augustine,  some  taken  down  by  hearers." 
Also  various  moral  treatises :  De  continentia  (395) ;  De  men- 

'  Tom.  iii.  117-324.  Not  to  be  confounded  -with  two  other  books  on  Genesis, 
in  which  he  defends  the  biblical  doctrine  of  creation  against  the  Manichseans.  In 
this  exegetical  work  he  aimed,  as  he  says,  Retract,  ii.  c.  24,  to  interpret  Genesis 
"non  secundum  allegoricas  significationes,  sed  secundum  rerum  gestarum  proprieta- 
tem."  The  work  is  more  original  and  spirited  than  the  Hexaemeron  of  BasU  or  of 
Ambrose.  • 

'  Tom.  iv.,  the  whole  volume. 

^  Tom.  iii.,  289-824. 

*  All  in  tom.  iii. 

*  Tom.  v.,  which  contains  besides  these  a  multitude  (31 7)  of  doubtful  and  spuri- 
ous sermons,  likewise  divided  into  four  classes.  To  these  must  be  added  recently 
discovered  sermons,  edited  from  manuscripts  in  Florence,  Monte  Cassino,  etc.,  by 
M.  Dexis  (1792),  0.  F.  Frangipaxe  (1820),  A.  L.  Caillau  (Paris,  1836),  and  Axgelo 
Mai  (in  the  Xova  Bibhotheca  Patrum). 


1016  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D,    311-590. 

dacio  (395),  against  deception  (not  to  be  confounded  with  the 
similar  work  already  mentioned  Contra  mendacium,  against 
the  fraud-theory  of  the  Priscillianists,  written  in  420) ;  De 
agone  Christiano  (396) ;  De  opere  monachorum,  against  monas- 
tic idleness  (400) ;  De  bono  conjugali  adv.  Jovinianum  (400) ; 
De  virginitate  (401) ;  De  fide  et  operibus  (413) ;  De  adulterinis 
conjugiis,  on  1  Cor.  vii.  10  sqq.  (419);  De  bono  viduitatis 
(418) ;  De  patientia  (418) ;  De  cura  pro  mortuis  gerenda,  to 
Panlinus  of  Nola  (421);  De  utilitate  jejunii;  De  diligendo 
Deo ;  Meditationes ;  etc.* 

As  we  survey  this  enormous  literary  labor,  augmented  by 
many  other  treatises  and  letters  now  lost,  and  as  we  consider 
his  episcopal  labors,  his  many  journeys,  and  his  adjudications 
of  controversies  among  the  faithful,  which  often  robbed  him 
of  whole  days,  we  must  be  really  astounded  at  the  fidelity, 
exuberance,  energy,  and  perseverance  of  this  father  of  the 
church.     Surely,  such  a  life  was  worth  the  living. 


§  180.     The  Influence  of  Augustine  upon  Posterity  and  his 
Relation  to  Catholicism  and  PTotestantisni. 

Before  we  take  leave  of  this  imposing  character,  and  of  the 
period  of  church  history  in  which  he  shines  as  the  brightest 
star,  we  must  add  some  observations  respecting  the  influence 
of  Augustine  on  the  world  since  his  time,  and  his  position  with 
reference  to  the  great  antagonism  of  Catholicism  and  Protes- 
tantism. All  the  church  fathers  are,  indeed,  the  common 
inheritance  of  both  parties  ;  but  no  other  of  them  has  produced 
so  permanent  efiects  on  both,  and  no  other  stands  in  so  high 
regard  with  both,  as  Augustine.  Upon  the  Greek  church 
alone  has  he  exercised  little  or  no  influence ;  for  this  church 

'  Most  of. them  in  torn.  vi.  ed.  Bened.  On  the  scripta  deperdita,  dubia  et  spuria 
of  Augustine,  see  the  index  by  Schonemann,  1.  c.  p.  50  sqq.,  and  in  the  supplemen- 
tal volume  of  Migne's  edition,  pp.  34—40.  The  so-called  Meditations  of  Augustine 
(German  translation  by  August  Krohne,  Stuttgart,  1854)  are  a  later  compilatiou  by 
the  abbot  of  Fescamp  in  France,  at  the  close  of  the  twelfth  century,  from  the  writ- 
ings of  Augustine,  Gregory  the  Great,  Anselm,  and  others. 


§  180.      AUGUSTmE's   RELATION   TO   CATHOLICISM,  ETC.    1017 

stopped  witli  the  undeveloped  synergistic  anthropology  of  the 
previous  age.* 

1.  Augustine,  in  the  first  place,  contributed  much  to  the 
development  of  the  doctrinal  basis  which  Catholicism  and 
Protestantism  hold  in  common  against  such  radical  heresies  of 
antiquity  as  Manichaeism,  Arianism,  and  Pelagianism.  In  all 
these  great  intellectual  conflicts  he  was  in  general  the  champion 
of  the  cause  of  Christian  truth  against  dangerous  eiTors. 
Through  his  influence  the  canon  of  Holy  Scripture  (including, 
indeed,  the  Old  Testament  Apocrypha)  was  fixed  in  its  present 
form  by  the  councils  of  Hippo  (393)  and  Carthage  (397).  He 
conquered  the  Manich^an  dualism,  hylozoism,  and  fatalism, 
and  saved  the  biblical  idea  of  God  and  of  creation,  and  the 
biblical  doctrine  of  the  nature  of  sin  and  its  origin  in  the  free 
will  of  man.  He  developed  the  Nicene  dogma  of  the  Trinity, 
completed  it  by  the  doctrine  of  the  double  procession  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  gave  it  the  fonn  in  which  it  has  ever  since 
prevailed  in  the  "West,  and  in  which  it  received  classical 
expression  from  his   school   in  the  Athanasian   Creed.      In 

*  It  betrays  a  very  contracted,  slavish,  and  mechanical  view  of  history,  when 
Roman  Catholic  divines  claim  the  fathers  as  their  exclusive  property ;  forgetting  that 
they  taught  a  great  many  things  which  are  as  inconsistent  with  the  papal  as  with 
the  Protestaiit  Creed,  and  knew  nothing  of  certain  dogmas  (such  as  the  infalUbility  of 
the  pope,  the  seven  sacraments,  transubstantiation,  purgatory,  indulgences,  auricular 
confession,  the  immaculate  conception  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  etc.),  which  are  essential 
to  Romanism.  "I  recollect  well,"  says  Dr.  Newman,  the  former  intellectual 
leader  of  Oxford  Tractarianism  (in  his  Letter  to  Dr.  Pusey  on  his  Eirenicon,  1866, 
p.  5),  "  what  an  outcast  I  seemed  to  myself,  wh^  I  took  down  from  the  shelves  of 
my  library  the  volumes  of  St.  Athanasius  or  St.  BasU,  and  set  myself  to  study  them ; 
and  how,  on  the  contrary,  when  at  length  I  was  brought  into  Catholic  communion, 
I  kissed  them  with  delight,  with  a  feeling  that  in  them  I  had  more  than  all  that  I 
had  lost,  and,  as  though  I  were  directly  addressing  the  glorious  saints,  who  be- 
queathed them  to  the  Church,  I  said  to  the  inanimate  pages,  '  Tou  are  now  mine, 
and  I  am  yours,  beyond  any  mistake.'  "  With  the  same  right  the  Jews  might  lay 
exclusive  claim  to  the  writings  of  Moses  and  the  prophets.  The  fathers  were  living 
men,  representing  the  onward  progress  and  conflicts  of  Christianity  in  their  time, 
unfolding  and  defending  great  truths,  but  not  unmixed  with  many  errors  and  imper- 
fections which  subsequent  times  have  corrected.  Those  are  the  true  children  of  the 
fathers  who,  standing  on  the  foundation  of  Christ  and  the  apostles,  and,  kissing  the 
New  Testament  rather  than  any  human  writings,  follow  them  only  as  far  as  they 
followed  Christ,  and  who  carry  forward  their  work  in  the  onward  march  of  true 
evangelical  catholic  Christianity. 


1018  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

Christologj,  on  the  contrary,  lie  added  nothing,  and  he  died 
shortly  before  the  great  Christological  conflicts  opened,  which 
reached  their  ecumenical  settlement  at  the  council  of  Chalce- 
don,  twenty  years  after  his  death.  Yet  he  anticipated  Leo  in 
giving  currency  in  the  West  to  the  important  formula :  "  Two 
natures  in  one  person."  " 

2.  Augustine  is  also  the  principal  theological  creator 
of  the  Latin- Catholic  system  as  distinct  from  the  Greek  Cath- 
olicism on  the  one  hand,  and  from  evangelical  Protestantism 
on  the  other.  He  ruled  the  entire  theology  of  the  middle  age, 
and  became  the  father  of  scholasticism  in  virtue  of  his  dialectic 
mind,  and  the  father  of  mysticism  in  virtue  of  his  devout 
heart,  without  being  responsible  for  the  excesses  of  either 
system.  For  scholasticism  thought  to  comprehend  the  divine 
with  the  understanding,  and  lost  itself  at  last  in  empty  dialec- 
tics ;  and  mysticism  endeavored  to  grasp  the  divine  with  feel- 
ing, and  easily  strayed  into  misty  sentimentalism ;  Augustine 
sought  to  apprehend  the  divine  with  the  united  power  of  mind 
and  heart,  of  bold  thought  and  humble  faith.'^  Anselm,  Ber- 
nard of  Clairvaux,  Thomas  Aquinas,  and  Bonaventura,  are  his 
nearest  of  kin  in  this  respect.  Even  now,  since  the  Catholic 
church  has  become  a  Roman  church,  he  enjoys  greater  consid- 
eration in  it  than  Ambrose,  Hilary,  Jerome,  or  Gregory  the 
Great.  All  this  cannot  possibly  be  explained  without  an 
interior  affinity.^ 

'  He  was  summoned  to  the  council  of  Ephesus,  which  condemned  Nestorianism 
in  431,  but  died  a  year  before  it  met.  He  prevailed  upon  the  Gallic  monk,  Lepo- 
rius,  to  retract  Nestorianism.  His  Christology  is  in  many  points  defective  and  ob- 
scure. Comp.  Dorner's  History  of  Christology,  ii.  pp.  90-98.  Jerome  did  still 
less  for  this  department  of  doctrine. 

^  WiGGERS  (Pragmat.  Darstellung  des  Augustiuismus  und  Pelagianismus,  i.  p. 
27)  finds  the  most  peculiar  and  remarkable  point  of  Augustine's  character  in  his 
singular  union  of  intellect  and  imagination,  scholasticism  and  mysticism,  in  which 
neither  can  be  said  to  predominate.     So  also  Huber,  1.  c.  p.  313. 

^  NouRRissoN,  the  able  expounder  of  the  plulosophy  of  Augustine,  says  (1.  c. 
torn.  i.  p.  iv) :  "  Je  ne  crois  pas,  qu'excepto  saint  Paul,  aucun  homme  ait  contribue 
davantage,  par  sa  parole  comme  par  ses  ecrits,  a  organiser,  h.  interpreter,  k  repandre 
le  christianisme ;  et,  apres  saint  Paul,  nul  apparemment,  non  pas  meme  le  glorieux, 
Tinvincible  Athanase,  n'a  travaille  d'une  maniere  aussi  puissante  ^  fonder  I'unite 
catholique." 


§  180.     Augustine's  relation  to  Catholicism,  etc.  1019 

His  very  conversion,  in  which,  besides  the  Scriptures,  the 
personal  intercoui'se  of  the  hierarchical  Ambrose  and  the  life 
of  the  ascetic  Anthony  had  great  influence,  was  a  transition 
not  from  heathenism  to  Christianity  (for  he  was  already  a 
Manichsean  Christian),  but  from  heresy  to  the  historical,  epis- 
copally  organized  church,  as,  for  the  time,  the  sole  authorized 
vehicle  of  the  apostolic  Christianity  in  conflict  with  those  sects 
and  parties  which  more  or  less  assailed  the  foundations  of  the 
gospel.'  It  was,  indeed,  a  full  and  unconditional  surrender  of 
his  mind  and  heart  to  God,  but  it  was  at  the  same  time  a  sub- 
mission of  his  private  judgment  to  the  authority  of  the  church 
which  led  him  to  the  faith  of  the  gospel.'  In  the  same  spirit 
he  embraced  the  ascetic  life,  without  which,  according  to  the 
Catholic  principle,  no  high  religion  is  possible.  He  did  not 
indeed  enter  a  cloister,  like  Luther,  whose  conversion  in  Erfurt 
was  likewise  essentially  catholic,  but  he  lived  in  his  house  in 
the  simplicity  of  a  monk,  and  made  and  kept  the  vow  of  volun- 
tary poverty  and  celibacy.^ 

He  adopted  Cyprian's  doctrine  of  the  church,  and  com- 
pleted it  in  the  conflict  with  Donatism  by  transferring  the 
predicates  of  unity,  holiness,  universality,  exclusiveness,  and 
maternity,  directly  to  the  actual  church  of  the  time,  which, 

'  On  the  catholic  and  ascetic  character  of  his  conversion  and  his  religion,  see 
the  observations  in  my  work  on  Augustine,  ch.  viii.,  in  the  German  edition. 

'  We  recall  his  famous  anti-Manichjean  dictum :  "  Ego  evangelic  non  crederem, 
nisi  me  catholicse  ecclesise  commoveret  auctoritas."  The  Protestant  would  reverse 
this  maxim,  and  ground  his  faith  in  the  church  on  his  faith  in  Christ  and  in  the 
gospel.  So  with  the  well-known  maxim  of  Irenseus :  "  Ubi  ecclesia,  ibi  Spiritus 
Dei,  et  ubi  Spiritus  Dei,  ibi  ecclesia."  According  to  the  spirit  of  Protestantism 
it  would  be  said  conversely:  "Where  the  Spirit  of  God  is,  there  is  the  church, 
and  where  the  church  is,  there  is  the  Spirit  of  God." 

'  According  to  genuine  Christian  principles  it  would  have  been  far  more  noble, 
if  he  had  married  the  African  woman  with  whom  he  had  lived  in  iUicit  intercourse  for 
thirteen  years,  who  was  always  faithful  to  him,  as  he  was  to  her,  and -had  borne  him 
his  beloved  and  highly  gifted  Adeodatus ;  instead  of  casting  her  off,  and,  as  he  for  a 
whUe  intended,  choosing  another  for  the  partner  of  his  hfe,  whose  excellences  were 
more  numerous.  The  superiority  of  the  evangelical  Protestant  morality  over  the  * 
Catholic  asceticism  is  here  palpable.  But  with  the  prevailing  spirit  of  his  age  he 
would  hardly  have  enjoyed  so  great  regard,  nor  accomplished  so  much  good,  if  he 
had  been  married.  Celibacy  was  the  bridge  from  the  heathen  degradation  of  mar- 
riage to  the  evangelical  Christian  exaltation  and  sanctification  of  the  family  hfe. 


1020  THIRD  PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

with,  a  firm  episcopal  organization,  an  unbroken  succession, 
and  the  Apostles'  Creed,  triumphantly  withstood  the  eighty 
or  the  hundi-ed  opposing  sects  in  the  heretical  catalogue  of  the 
day,  and  had  its  visible  centre  in  Rome.  In  this  church  he 
had  found  rescue  from  the  shipwreck  of  his  life,  the  home  of 
true  Chi'istianity,  firm  ground  for  his  thinking,  satisfaction  for 
his  heart,  and  a  commensurate  field  for  the  wide  range  of  his 
powers.  The  predicate  of  infallibility  alone  he  does  not 
plainly  bring  forward ;  he  assumes  a  progi^essive  correction  of 
earlier  councils  by  later ;  and  in  the  Pelagian  controversy  he 
asserts  the  same  independence  towards  pope  Zosimus,  which 
Cyprian  before  him  had  shown  towards  pope  Stephen  in  the 
controversy  on  heretical  baptism,  with  the  advantage  of  having 
the  right  on  his  side,  so  that  Zosimus  found  himself  compelled 
to  yield  to  the  African  church.^ 

He  was  the  first  to  give  a  clear  and  fixed  definition  of  the 
sacrament,  as  a  visible  sign  of  invisible  grace,  resting  on  divine 
appointment ;  but  he  knows  nothing  of  the  number  seven ;  this 
was  a  much  later  enactment.  In  the  doctrine  of  baptism  he  is 
entirely  Catholic,^  though  in  logical  contradiction  with  his  dogma 
of  predestination ;  but  in  the  doctrine  of  the  holy  communion 
he  stands,  like  his  predecessors,  Tertullian  and  Cyprian,  nearer 
to  the  Calvinistic  theory  of  a  spiritual  presence  and  fruition 
of  Christ's  body  and  blood.  He  also  contributed  to  promote, 
at  least  in  his  later  writings,  the  Catholic  faith  of  miracles,' 

'  On  Augustine's  doctrine  of  the  church,  see  §  71,  above,  and  especially  the 
thorough  account  by  R.  Rothe  :  Anfange  der  christl.  Kirche  und  ihrer  Verfassung, 
vol.  i.  (ISSV),  pp.  6'79-711.  "Augustine,"  says  he,  "decidedly  adopted  Cyprian's 
conception  [of  the  church]  in  all  essential  points.  And  once  adopting  it,  he  pene- 
trated it  in  its  whole  depth  with  his  wonderfully  powerful  and  exuberant  soul,  and, 
by  means  of  his  own  clear,  logical  mind,  gave  it  the  perfect  and  rigorous  system 
which  perhaps  it  still  lacked"  (p.  679  f.).  "Augustine's  conception  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  church  was  about  standard  for  succeeding  times  "  (p.  685). 

-  Respecting  Augustine's  doctrine  of  baptism,  see  the  thorough  discussion  in  W. 

Wall's  History  of  Infant  Baptism,  vol.  i.  p.  173  ff.  (Oxford  ed.  of  1862).     His  view 

,of  the  shght  condemnation  of  all  uubaptized  children  contains  the  germ  of  the 

scholastic  fancy  of  the  limhus  infantum  and  the  posna  damni,  as  distinct  from  the 

lower  regions  of  hell  and  the  ^oe«a  sensus. 

^  In  his  former  writings  he  expressed  a  truly  philosophical  view  concerning 
miracles  (De  vera  rcUg.  c.  25,  §  47  ;  c.  50,  §  98 ;  De  utilit.  credendi,  c.  IC,  §  34  ; 
De  peccat.  meritis  et  remiss.  1.  ii.  c.  32,  §52,  and  De  civit.  Dei,  xxii.  c.  8) ;  but  in 


§  180.    Augustine's  delation  to  Catholicism,  etc.  1021 

and  the  worship  of  Mary ; '  though  he  exempts  the  Virgin 
only  from  actual  sin,  not  from  original,  and,  with  all  his 
reverence  for  her,  never  calls  her  mother  of  God.  * 

At  first  an  advocate  of  religions  liberty  and  of  purely  spir- 
itual methods  of  opposing  error,  he  afterwards  asserted  the 
fatal  principle  of  the  coge  intrare^  and  lent  the  great  weight 
of  his  authority  to  the  system  of  civil  persecution,  at  the 
bloody  fruits  of  which  in  the  middle  age  he  himself  would 
have  shuddered ;  for  he  was  always  at  heart  a  man  of  love  and 
gentleness,  and  personally  acted  on  the  glorious  principle: 
•' Nothing  conquers  but  truth,  and  the  victory  of  truth  is 
love." ' 

Thus  even  truly  great  and  good  men  have  unintentionally, 
through  mistaken  zeal,  become  the  authors  of  much  mischief. 

3.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  Augustine  is,  of  all  the  fathers, 
nearest  to  evangelical  ProtestantisTn^  and  may  be  called,  in 
respect  of  his  doctrine  of  sin  and  grace,  the  first  forenmner  of 
the  Reformation.  The  Lutheran  and  Reformed  churches  have 
ever  conceded  to  him,  without  scruple,  the  cognomen  of  Saint, 

his  Retract.  1.  i.  c.  14,  §  5,  he  corrects  or  modifies  a  former  remark  in  his  book  De 
utilit.  credendi,  stating  that  he  did  not  mean  to  deny  the  continuance  of  miracles 
altogether,  but  only  such  great  miracles  as  occurred  at  the  time  of  Christ  ("  quia 
non  tanta  nee  omnia,  non  quia  nulla  fiunt ").  See  above,  §§  87  and  88,  and  the 
instructive  monograph  of  the  younger  Nitzsch  (Lie.  and  Privatdoeent  in  Berhn) : 
Augustinus'  Lehre  vom  Wunder,  Berlin,  1865  (97  pp.). 

*  See  above,  §§  81  and  82. 

^  Comp.  Tract,  in  Evang.  Joannis,  viii.  c.  9,  where  he  says:  "  Cur  ergo  ait  matri 
filius :  Quid  mihi  et  tibi  est,  mulier  ?  nondum  venit  hora  mea  (John  ii.  4).  Dominus 
noster  Jesus  Christus  et  Deus  erat  et  homo :  secundum  quod  Deus  erat,  matrem  non 
hahebat ;  secundum  quod  homo  erat,  habebat.  Mater  ergo  [Maria]  erat  carnis,  mater 
humanitatis,  mater  infirmitatis  quam  suscepit  propter  nos."  This  strict  separation 
of  the  Godhead  from  the  manhood  of  Jesus  in  his  birth  from  the  Virgin  would  have 
exposed  Augustine  in  the  East  to  the  suspicion  of  Nestorianism.  But  he  died  a 
year  before  the  council  of  Ephesus,  at  which  Nestorius  was  condemned. 

'  See  above,  §  2*7,  p.  144  f.  He  changed  his  view  partly  from  his  experience 
that  the  Donatists,  in  his  own  diocese,  were  converted  to  the  cathoUc  unity  "  timore 
legum  imperiahum,"  and  were  afterwards  perfectly  good  Cathohcs.  He  adduces 
also  a  misinterpretation  of  Luke  xiv.  23,  and  Prov.  ix.  9 :  "Da  sapienti  occasionem 
et  sapientior  erit."  Ep.  93,  ad  Vincentium  Rogatistam,  §  17  (torn.  ii.  p.  237  sq.  ed. 
Bened.).  But  he  expressly  discouraged  the  infliction  of  death  on  heretics,  and 
adjured  the  proconsul  Donatus,  Ep.  100,  by  Jesus  Christ,  not  to  repay  the  Donatists 
in  kind.    "  Corrigi  eos  cupimus,  non  necari." 


1022  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

and  claimed  him  as  one  of  the  most  enlightened  witnesses  of  the 
truth  and  most  striking  examples  of  the  marvellous  power  of 
divine  grace  in  the  transformation  of  a  sinner.  It  is  worthy 
of  mark,  that  his  Pauline  doctrines,  which  are  most  nearly 
akin  to  Protestantism,  are  the  later  and  more  mature  parts  of 
his  system,  and  that  just  these  found  great  acceptance  with 
the  laity.  The  Pelagian  controversy,  in  which  he  developed 
his  anthropology,  marks  the  culmination  of  his  theological 
and  ecclesiastical  career,  and  his  latest  writings  were  directed 
against  the  Pelagian  Julian  and  the  Semi-Pelagians  in  Gaul, 
who  were  brought  to  his  notice  by  the  two  friendly  laymen, 
Prosper  and  Hilary.  These  anti-Pelagian  works  have  wrought 
mightily,  it  is  most  true,  upon  the  Catholic  chm-ch,  and  have 
held  in  check  the  Pelagianizing  tendencies  of  the  hierarchical 
and  monastic  system,  but  they  have  never  passed  into  its 
blood  and  marrow.  They  waited  for  a  favorable  future,  and 
nourished  in  silence  an  opposition  to  the  prevailing  system. 

Even  in  the  middle  age  the  better  sects,  which  attempted 
to  simplify,  purify,  and  spiritualize  the  reigning  Christianity 

'  by  return  to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  the  reformers  before 
the  Peformation,  such  as  "Wiclif,  Huss,  Wessel,  resorted  most, 
after  the  apostle  Paul,  to  the  bishop  of  Hippo  as  the  represen- 
tative of  the  doctrine  of  free  grace. 

The  Reformers  were  led  by  his  writings  into  a  deeper 
understanding  of  Paul,  and  so  prepared  for  their  great  voca- 
tion. Ko  church  teacher  did  so  much  to  mould  Luther  and 
Calvin;   none  furnished  them   so  powerful  weapons  against 

■  the  dominant  Pelagianism  and  formalism ;  none  is  so  often 
quoted  by  them  with  esteem  and  love.' 

*  Luther  pronounced  upon  the  church  fathers  (with  whom,  however,  excepting 
Augustine,  he  was  but  slightly  acquainted)  very  condemnatory  judgments,  even 
upon  Basil,  Chrysostom,  and  Jerome  (for  Jerome  he  had  a  downright  antipathy,  on 
accoimt  of  his  advocacy  of  fasts,  virginity,  and  monkery) ;  he  was  at  times  dissatis- 
fied- even  with  Augustine,  because  he  after  aU  did  not  find  in  him  his  sola  fide,  his 
.  articulus  stands  et  cadeniis  ecdesia;  And  snjs  of  him :  "  Augustine  often  erred ;  he 
cannot  be  trusted.  Though  he  was  good  and  holy,  yet  he,  as  well  as  other  fathers, 
was  wanting  in  the  true  faith."  But  this  cursory  utterance  is  overborne  by  numer- 
ous commendations ;  and  all  such  judgments  of  Luther  must  be  taken  cum  grano 
sails.     He  calls  Augustine  the  most  pious,  gi'ave,  and  sincere  of  the  fathers,  the 


§  180.     ArarsTTNE's  relation  to  Catholicism,  etc.  1023 

All  the  Reformers  in  the  outset,  Melancthon  and  Zwingle 
among  them,  adopted  his  denial  of  free  will  and  his  doctrine 
of  predestination,  and  sometimes  even  went  beyond  him  into 
the  abyss  of  supralapsarianism,  to  cut  out  the  last  roots  of 
human  merit  and  boasting.  In  this  point  Augustine  holds  the 
same  relation  to  the  Catholic  church,  as  Luther  to  the  Luth- 
eran ;  that  is,  he  is  a  heretic  of  unimpeachable  authority,  who 
is  more  admu-ed  than  censured  even  in  his  extravagances ;  yet 
his  doctrine  of  predestination  was  indirectly  condemned  by  the 
pope  in  Jansenism,  as  Luther's  view  was  rejected  as  Calvin- 
ism by  the  Form  of  Concord.'     For  Jansenism  was  nothing 

patron  of  diTines,  who  taught  a  pure  doctrine  and  submitted  it  in  Christian  humility 
to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  etc.,  and  he  thinks,  if  he  had  Uved  in  the  sixteenth  century, 
he  would  have  been  a  Protestant  (si  hoc  seculo  viveret,  nobiscum  sentiret),  while 
Jerome  would  have  gone  with  Rome.  Compare  his  singular  but  striking  judgments 
on  the  fathers  in  Lutheri  CoUoquia,  ed.  H.  E.  Bindseil,  1863,  tom.  ill.  149,  and  many 
other  places.  Gaxgauf,  a  Roman  CathoUc  (a  pupil  of  the  philosopher  Giinther), 
concedes  (L  c.  p.  28,  note  13)  that  Luther  and  Calvin  built  their  doctrinal  system 
mainly  on  Augustine,  but,  as  he  correctly  thinks,  with  only  partial  right.  Xocrris- 
sox,  likewise  a  Roman  CathoUc,  derives  Protestantism  from  a  corrupted  (!)  Augus- 
tinianism,  and  very  superficially  makes  Lutheranism  and  Calvinism  essentially  to 
consist  in  the  denial  of  the  freedom  of  the  will,  which  was  only  one  of  the  questions 
of  the  Reformation.  "  On  ne  saurait  le  meconnaitre,  de  1' Augustinianisme  corrompu, 
mais  enfin  de  1' Augustinianisme  procede  le  Protestantisme.  Car,  sans  parler  de 
Wiclef  et  de  Huss,  qui,  nourris  de  saint  Augustin,  soutiennent,  avec  le  realisme 
platonicien,  la  doctrine  de  la  predestination ;  Luther  et  Calvin  ne  font  guere  autre 
chose,  dans  leurs  principaux  ouvrages,  que  cultiver  des  semences  d' Augustinian- 
isme" (1.  c.  ii.  p.  176).  But  the  Reformation  is  far  more,  of  course,  than  a  repristi- 
nation  of  an  old  controversy ;  it  is  a  new  creation,  and  marks  the  epoch  of  modem 
Christianity  which  is  different  both  from  the  mediaeval  and  from  ancient  or  patristic 
Christianity.  * 

^  It  is  well  known  that  Luther,  as  late  as  1526,  m  his  work,  De  servo  arbitrio, 
against  Erasmus,  which  he  never  retracted,  proceeded  upon  the  most  rigorous  notion 
of  the  divine  omnipotence,  wholly  denied  the  freedom  of  the  wUl,  declared  it  a 
mere  lie  (merum  mendacium),  pronounced  the  calls  of  the  Scriptures  to  repentance 
a  divine  irony,  based  eternal  salvation  and  eternal  perdition  upon  the  secret  will 
of  God,  and  almost  exceeded  Calvin.  See  particulars  in  the  books  on  doctrine- 
history;  the  inaugural  dissertation  of  Jcl.  Mvller:  Lutheri  de  prsedestinatione 
et  libero  arbitrio  doctrina,  Gott.  1832;  and  a  historical  treatise  on  predestination 
by  Carl  Beck  in  the  Studien  und  Kritiken  for  1847.  "We  add,  as  a  curiosity,  the 
opinion  of  Gibbon  (ch.  xxxiii.),  who,  however,  had  a  very  limited  and  superficial 
knowledge  of  Augustine:  "The  rigid  system  of  Christianity  which  he  framed  or 
restored,  has  been  entertained,  with  public  applause,  and  secret  reluctance,  by  the 
Latin  church.     The  church  of  Rome  has  canonized  Augustine,  and  reprobated  Cal- 


1024  THIRD   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

but  a  revival  of  Angustinianism  in  the  bosom  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  church.^ 

The  excess  of  Augustine  and  the  Reformers  in  this  direc- 
tion is  due  to  the  earnestness  and  energy  of  their  sense  of  sin 
and  grace.  The  Pelagian  looseness  could  never  beget  a  re- 
former. It  was  only  the  unshaken  conviction  of  man's  own 
inability,  of  unconditional  dependence  on  God,  and  of  the 
almighty  power  of  his  grace  to  give  us  strength  for  every  good 
work,  which  could  do  this.  He  who  would  give  others  the 
conviction  that  he  has  a  divine  vocation  for  the  church  and 
for  mankind,  must  himself  be  penetrated  with  the  faith  of  an 
eternal,  unalterable  decree  of  God,  and  must  cling  to  it  in  the 
darkest  hours. 

In  great  men,  and  only  in  great  men,  great  opposites  and 
apparently  antagonistic  truths  live  together.  Small  minds 
cannot  hold  them.  The  catholic,  churchly,  sacramental,  and 
sacerdotal  system  stands  in  conflict  with  the  evangelical  Protes- 
tant Christianity  of  subjective,  personal  experience.  The  doc- 
trine of  universal  baptismal  regeneration,  in  particular,  which 
presu2:>poses  a  universal  call  (at  least  within  the  church),  can 
on  j)rincij)les  of  logic  hardly  be  united  with  the  doctrine  of  an 
absolute  predestination,  which  limits  the  decree  of  redemption 
to  a  portion  of  the  baptized.  Augustine  supposes,  on  the  one 
hand,  that  every  baptized  person,  through  the  inward  opera- 
tion of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  accompanies  the  outward  act 
of  the  sacrament,  receives  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  is  trans- 
lated from  the  state  of  nature  into  the  state  of  grace,  and  thus, 

vin.  Yet  as  the  real  difference  between  them  is  invisible  even  to  a  theological 
microscope,  the  Molinists  are  oppressed  by  the  authority  of  the  saint,  and  the 
Jansenists  are  disgraced  by  their  resemblance  to  the  heretic.  In  the  mean  while 
the  Protestant  Arminians  stand  aloof,  and  deride  the  mutual  perplexity  of  the 
disputants.  Perhaps  a  reasoner,  still  more  independent,  may  smile  in  his  turn 
when  he  peruses  an  Arminian  commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans."  Nour- 
EissoN  (ii.  1*79),  from  his  Romish  stand-point,  likewise  makes  Lutheranism  to  consist 
"  essentiellement  dans  la  question  du  libre  arbitre."  But  the  prmciple  of  Lutheran- 
ism, and  of  Protestantism  generally,  is  the  supremacy  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  as  a 
rule  of  faith,  and  justification  by  free  grace  through  faith  in  Christ. 

'  On  the  mighty  influence  of  Augustine  in  the  seventeenth  century  in  France, 
especially  on  the  noble  Jansenists,  see  the  works  on  Jansenism,  and  also  Nojkris- 
SON,  1.  c.  tom.  ii.  pp.  186-276. 


§  180.       ATTGrSTTNE's   RELATION   TO    CATHOLICISM:,  ETC.    1025 

qua  haptisahis,  is  also  a  cliild  of  God  and  an  heir  of  eternal 
life;  and  vet,  on  tbe  other  hand,  he  makes  all  these  benefits 
dependent  on  the  absolute  will  of  God,  who  saves  only  a  cer- 
tain number  out  of  the  "  mass  of  perdition,"  and  preserves 
these  to  the  end.  Eegeneration  and  election,  with  him,  do 
not,  as  with  Calvin,  coincide.  The  former  mav  exist  without 
the  latter,  but  the  latter  cannot  exist  without  the  former. 
Augustine  assumes  that  many  are  actually  born  into  the  king- 
dom of  grace  only  to  perish  again  ;  Calvin  holds  that  in  the 
case  of  the  non-elect  baptism  is  an  unmeaning  ceremony ;  the 
one  putting  the  delusion  in  the  inward  effect,  the  other  in  the 
outward  fonn.  The  sacramental,  churchly  system  throws  the 
main  stress  upon  the  baptismal  regeneration  to  the  injury  of 
the  eternal  election ;  the  Calvinistic  and  Puritan  system  sacri- 
fices the  vii'tue  of  the  sacrament  to  the  election ;  the  Lutheran 
and  Anglican  system  seeks  a  middle  ground,  without  being 
able  to  give  a  satisfactory  theological  solution  of  the  problem. 
The  Anglican  church  allows  the  two  opposite  views,  and  sanc- 
tions the  one  in  the  baptismal  service  of  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  the  other  in  her  Thirty-nine  Articles,  which  are  mod- 
erately Calvinistic. 

It  was  an  evident  ordering  of  God,  that  the  Augustiniau 
system,  like  the  Latin  Bible  of  Jerome,  appeared  just  in  that 
transitional  period  of  history,  in  which  the  old  civilization  was 
passing  away  before  the  flood  of  barbarism,  and  a  new  order 
of  things,  under  the  guidance  of  the  Christian  religion,  was 
in  preparation.  The  church,  with  her  strong,  imposing  organ- 
ization and  her  firm  system  of  doctrine,  must  save  Christianity 
amidst  the  chaotic  turmoil  of  the  great  migration,  and  must 
become  a  training-school  for  the  barbarian  nations  of  the 
middle  age.' 

'  GuizoT,  the  Protestant  historian  and  statesman,  very  correctly  says  m  his 
Histoire  generale  de  la  civilization  en  Europe  (Deuxieme  legon,  p.  45  sq.  ed.  Brux- 
elles,  1850):  "S'il  n'eut  pas  ete  une  eglise,  je  ne  sais  ce  qui  en  serait  avenu  au 
milieu  de  la  chute  de  I'empire  romain.  .  .  .  Si  le  christianisme  n'eut  etc 
comme  dans  les  premiers  temps,  qu'une  crbyance,  un  sentiment,  une  conviction 
individuelle,  on  peut  croire  qu'il  aurait  succombe  au  milieu  de  la  dissolution  de 
I'empire  et  de  I'invasion  des  barbares.  II  a  succombe  plus  tard,  en  Asie  et  dans 
tons  le  nord  de  I'Afrique,  sous  une  invasion  de  meme  nature,  sous  I'invasion  des 
VOL.  II. — 65 


1026  THIED   PEEIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

In  this  process  of  training,  next  to  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
the  scholarship  of  Jeeome  and  the  theology  and  fertile  ideas 
of  Augustine  were  the  most  important  intellectual  agent. 

Augustine  was  held  in  so  universal  esteem  that  he  could 
exert  influence  in  all  directions,  and  even  in  his  excesses  gave 
no  ofi'ence.  He  was  sufficiently  catholic  for  the  principle  of 
church  authority,  and  yet  at  the  same  time  so  free  and  evan- 
gelical that  he  modified  its  hierarchical  and  sacramental  char- 
acter, reacted  against  its  tendencies  to  outward,  mechanical 
ritualism,  and  kept  alive  a  deep  consciousness  of  sin  and  grace, 
and  a  spirit  of  fervent  and  truly  Christian  piety,  until  that 
spirit  grew  strong  enough  to  bi'eak  the  shell  of  hierarchical 
tutelage,  and  enter  a  new  stage  of  its  development.  No  other 
father  could  have  acted  more  beneficently  on  the  Catholicism 
of  the  middle  age,  and  more  successfully  provided  for  the 
evangelical  Reformation  than  St.  Augustine,  the  worthy  suc- 
cessor of  Paul,  and  the  precursor  of  Luther  and  Calvin. 

Had  he  lived  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  he  would  in 
all  probability  have  taken  the  lead  of  the  evangelical  move- 
ment against  the  j)revailing  Pelagianism  of  the  Eoman  church. 
For  we  must  not  forget  that,  notwithstanding  their  strong 
affinity,  there  is  an  important  difference  between  Catholicism 
and  Komanism  or  Popery.  They  sustain  a  similar  relation  to 
each  other  as  the  Judaism  of  the  Old  Testament  dispensation, 
which  looked  to,  and  prepared  the  way  for,  Chi-istianity,  and 

barbares  musiilinans ;  il  a  succombe  alors,  quoiqu'U  fiit  k  I'etat  d'institution,  d'eglise 
constituee.  A  bien  plus  forte  raison  le  meme  fait  aurait  pu  arriver  au  moment  de 
la  chute  de  I'empire  romain.  II  n'y  avait  alors  aucun  des  mojens  par  lesquels 
aujourd'hui  les  influences  morales  s'etablissent  ou  resistent  iudependamment  des 
institutions,  aucun  des  moyens  par  lesquels  une  pure  verite,  une  pure  idee  acquiert. 
un  grand  empire  sur  les  esprits,  gouverne  les  actions,  determine  des  cvdnemens. 
Rien  de  semblable  n'existait  au  IV''  siecle,  pour  donner  aux  idees,  aux  sentiments 
personels,  ime  pareille  autorite.  II  est  clair  qu'il  fallait  une  societe  fortement  orga- 
rdsee,  fortement  gouvernee,  pour  lutter  contre  un  pareil  desastre,  pour  sortir  victo- 
rieuse  d'un  tel  ouragan.  Je  ne  crois  pas  trop  dire  en  affirmant  qu'i  la  fin  du 
rV*  et  au  commencement  du  V"  siecle,  c'est  I'cglise  chretieune  qui  a  sauy6  le  chris- 
tianisme;  c'est  I'eglise  avec  ses  institutions,  ses  maglstrats,  son  pouvoir,  qui  s'est 
defendue  vigourcusement  contre  la  dissolution  intericure  de  I'empire,  contre  la  bar- 
baric, qui  a  conqnis  les  barbares,  qui  est  devenue  le  lien,  le  moyen,  le  principe  de 
oi\  i!i-<ation  eatre  le  monde  romain  et  le  moude  barbare." 


§  180.    Augustine's  eelation  to  Catholicism,  etc.  1027 

tlie  Judaism  after  the  cniciiixion  and  after  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  which  is  antagonistic  to  Christianity.  Catliolicism 
covers  the  entire  ancient  and  niediaBval  history  of  the  church, 
and  includes  the  Pauline,  Augustinian,  or  evangelical  tenden- 
cies which  increased  with  the  corruptions  of  the  papacy  and 
the  growing  sense  of  the  necessity  of  a  "  reformatio  in  capite  et 
membris."  Romanism  proper  dates  from  the  council  of  Trent, 
which  gave  it  symbolical  expression  and  anathematized  the 
doctrines  of  the  Reformation.  Catholicism  is  the  strength  of 
Eomacism,  Romanism  is  the  weakness  of  Catholicism.  Cath- 
olicism produced  Jansenism,  Popery  condemned  it.  Popery 
never  forgets  and  never  learns  anything,  and  can  allow  no 
change  in  doctrine  (except  by  way  of  addition),  without  sacri- 
ficing its  fundamental  principle  of  infallibility,  and  thus  com- 
mitting suicide.  But  Catholicism  may  ultimately  burst  the 
chains  of  Popery  which  have  so  long  kept  it  confined,  and  may 
assume  new  life  and  vigor. 

Such  a  personage  as  Augustine,  still  holding  a  mediating 
place  between  the  two  great  divisions  of  Christendom,  revered 
alike  by  both,  and  of  equal  influence  with  both,  is  furthermore 
a  welcome  pledge  of  the  elevating  prospect  of  a  future  recon- 
ciliation of  Catholicism  and  Protestantism  in  a  higher  unity, 
conserving  all  the  truths,  losing  all  the  errors,  forgiving  all 
the  sins,  forgetting  all  the  enmities  of  both.  After  all,  the 
contradiction  between  authority  and  freedom,  the  objective 
and  the  subjective,  the  churchly  and  the  personal,  the  organic 
and  the  individual,  the  sacramental  and  the  experimental  in 
religion,  is  not  absolute,  but  relative  and  temporary,  and  arises 
not  so  much  from  the  nature  of  things,  as  from  the  deficiencies 
of  man's  kiiowledge  and  piety  in  this  world.  These  elements 
admit  of  an  ultimate  harmony  in  the  perfect  state  of  the 
church,  corresponding  to  the  union  of  the  divine  and  human 
natures,  which  transcends  the  limits  of  finite  thought  and 
logical  comprehension,  and  is  yet  completely  realized  in  the 
person  of  Christ.  They  are  in  fact  united  in  the  theological 
system  of  St.  Paul,  who  had  the  highest  view  of  the  church, 
as  the  mystical  "  body  of  Christ,"  and  "  the  pillar  and  ground 
of  the  truth,"  and  who  was  at  the  same  time  the  great  cham- 


1028  THIRD   PERIOD.    A.D.    311-590. 

pion  of  evangelical  fi'eedom,  individual  responsibility,  and  per- 
sonal union  of  the  believer  v^iih  his  Saviour.     We  believe  in 

AND  HOPE  FOE  ONE  HOLT  CATHOLIC  APOSTOLIC  CHURCH,  ONE 
COMMUNION    OF    SAINTS,    ONE    FOLD,    AND   ONE    ShEPHERD.        The 

more  the  different  churches  become  truly  Chi'istian,  or  draw 
nearer  to  Chi'ist,  and  the  more  they  give  real  effect  to  His 
kingdom,  the  nearer  will  they  come  to  one  another.  For 
Christ  is  the  common  head  and  vital  centre  of  all  believers, 
and  the  divine  harmony  of  all  discordant  human  sects  and 
creeds.  In  Christ,  says  Pascal,  one  of  the  greatest  and  noblest 
disciples  of  Augustine,  In   Christ  all  contradictions  are 

SOLVED. 


^JrSi^^fr^:^!  //-^/  / 


aa. 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX 


SECOND  AND  THIRD  VOLUMES. 


Abgarus,  p.  569. 

Abyssinians,  Vl?  f. 

Acta  Sanctorum,  446  ff.,  and  passim  in 
the  Literature. 

Adeodatus,  992,  1008  f. 

Advent,  397. 

.(Elurus,  Timotheus,  165. 

Aerius,  233. 

AiJTius,  637. 

Agapetcs,  326. 

Agnoetoe,  767. 

Aktistetae,  767. 

Alaric,  641. 

Alexander  of  Alexandria,  620. 

Alexandrian  school  of  theology,  236,  612, 
619,  706,  922,  937,  946. 

All  Saints,  feast  of,  408,  444. 

Altar,  549. 

Altpius,  992,  1008. 

Ambrose,  on  persecution,  143  ;  on  monas- 
ticism,  201 ;  on  the  papacy,  304 ;  on 
church  discipline  (Theodosius  M.),  359, 
963;  on  Mariolatry,  417;  on  the  wor- 
ship of  saints  and  relics,  440,  457,  458  ; 
liturgy  of,  533  ;  his  hymns,  590  f. ;  his 
life  and  writings,  961-967;  influence 
on  Augustine,  991. 

Ambrosiaster,  965. 

Anaphora,  525. 

Anastasia,  church  of,  917,  919. 

Anastasics  II.,  pope,  324. 

Anatolics  of  Constantinople,  583. 

Andrew  of  Crete,  583. 


Angelo   Mai,    949,  and  passim  in   the 

Literature,  especially  ch.  x. 
Angels,  worship  of,  430. 
Anhypostasia,  757  ff. 
Annunciation  of  Mary,  425. 
Anthimcs,  769. 
Anthony  of  Egypt,  181  ff. 
Anthropological  controversies,  785  &,,•'' 
ANTHrsA,  934.  '■'^^    -^ 

Antiochian  school  of  theology,  612,  707, 

937. 
Aphtharlodocetae,  766. 
Apiarius,  294. 
Apollinarianism,  709  ff. 
Apollinaris,  709  ff. 
Apologetics  and  Polemics,  72,  81,  etc. 
Aquileia,  274,  293. 
Arausio,  synod  of,  866. 
Arcadius,  66,  129,  704.. 
Archbishops,  270. 
Architecture,  541. 
Archpresbvter,  259. 
Arianism,  618  ff.,  641  ff.,  644  ff. 
ARirs,  620,  627,  633. 
Armenians,  779  ff. 
Ascension  Day,  408. 
Asceticism,  149  ff. 
AscusNAGES,  674,  767. 
AssEMANi,  783,  949,  and  passim. 
Assumption  of  Mary,  426. 
AsTERics  of  Asiasia,  440. 
Asylum,  right  of,  104. 
Athanasian  Creed,  689  ff. 
Athanasius  THE  Great,  82 ;  on  monasti- 

cism,  201 ;    on  the  eucharist,  495  f. ; 

on  Scripture  and  tradition,  607 ;  at  the 


1030 


ALPHABETICAL   INDEX. 


council  of  NicEca,  626  f . ;  during  the 
Arian  controversies,  632  ff. ;  on  Arian- 
ism,  647  ff. ;  on  the  homoousion,  660 
ff. ;  on  the  Holy  Ghost,  665  ;  -on  Chris- 
tology,  706  f. ;  against  Apollinarianism, 
713  ;  his  life  and  writings,  884  ff. 

Athens,  894  f.,  912. 

Attila  and  Leo,  821. 

Audians,  199. 

Augustine,  his  City  of  God,  85,  1010 ; 
on  slavery,  119  ;  on  religious  toleration 
and  persecution,  144,  1021  ;  on  monas- 
ticism,  1 64,  202  ;  on  the  holy  ministry, 
251 ;  on  veracity,  255  ;  on  the  papacy, 
306 ;  on  general  councils,  343  ;  his  con- 
troversy with  the  Donatists,  363  ff. ;  on 
Mariology  and  Mariolatry,  415,  418  f., 
1021 ;  on  the  worship  of  saints,  441 ;  on 
the  worship  of  reUcs,  459  f. ;  on  mira- 
cles,460, 464 ;  on  the  sacraments,  475  ff. ; 
on  baptism,  482  ff. ;  on  the  eucharist, 
498,  507 ;  hymns  of,  593  ;  on  the  canon, 
609;  on  tradition,  613;  on  the  Holy 
Trinity,  684  ff. ;  on  the  double  proces- 
sion of  the  Holy  Gliost,  686  ;  his  doc- 
trines of  sin  and  grace,  785  ff. ;  on  the 
origin  of  the  soul,  831  ff. ;  on  the  con- 
demnation of  unbaptized  children,  835 
,  f. ;  on  the  possibility  of  salvation  out 

' O  ^  of  the  church,  836 ;  on  heathen  morali- 

ty, 841  f. ;  on  predestination,  850  ff. ; 
on  Semi-Pelagianism,  859  ff. ;  on  here- 
•  sieS^  931  f. ;  on  the  Vulgate  and  Sep- 
tuagint,  976;  relation  to  Jerome,  213, 
979  f.,  984  (note);  his  hfe  and  charac- 
ter, 988-1002;  his  works,  1003-1016; 
his  influence  on  posterity  and  relation 
to  Catholicism  and  Protestantism,  1016- 
1028. 

Augustinianism,  785  ff. 

AuEELius  OP  Carthage,  793. 

Ave  Maria,  424. 

AVITUS  OF  ViEKNE,  866. 


B 

Bancroft,  on  the  Arian  controversy,  644. 

Baptism,  sacrament  of,  480  ff. ;  834  ff. 

Baptisteries,  558  ff. 

Bap.-Anina,  970. 

Basil,  St.,  on  monasticism,  198;  on  the 
worship  of  saints,  438 ;  on  the  eucha- 
rist, 497 ;  liturgy  of,  530 ;  on  images, 
567 ;  against  Ariauism,  638 ;  on  the 
Holy  Ghost,  664  f. ;  his  life  and  writ- 
ings, 893  ff. 

Basilica,  551  ff. 

Basiliscus,  765. 


Baur,  on  Julian,  48  (note) ;  on  the  Arian 
controversy,  641 ;  on  the  Creed  of 
Chalcedon,  759  (note) ;  on  St.  Augus- 
tine, 815  f.  (note),  822,  832,  838,  842; 
on  Semi-Pelagianism,  858  (note);  on 
Athanasius,  889  (note);  on  Cyril  of 
Alexandria,  945 ;  on  the  system  of 
Augustine,  999,  1002. 

Benedict,  St.,  216  ff. 

Benedictus,  224  ff. 

Betschlag,  on  the  Christology  of  Chalce- 
don, 759  (note). 

BiNDEMANN,  on  St.  Augustiuc,  1002 
(note). 

Bishops,  263  ff. 

BoiJTHius,  751. 

BoLAND,  and  the  Bollandists,  448. 

Boniface  II.,  pope,  326,  869. 

Brahmanism,  150. 

Broglie,  3,  11;  on  Athanasius,  890 
(note). 

Buddhism,  150. 

Bull,  G.,  662. 

Byzantine  court,  128  and  passim. 

Byzantine  style  of  architecture,  555  ff. 


c 


C^SARius  OF  Arles,  866. 

C^SARius,  brother  of  Gregory  Nazianzen, 
912. 

Calendar,  445. 

Calvin  and  Augustine,  852,  1022  f. 

Candlemas,  425. 

Canon,  608  ff. 

Carthage,  synod  of,  793,  798. 

Cassian,  860  ff. 

Cassiciacum,  991. 

Cassiodorus,  225  f.,  884. 

Catechetical  instruction,  487. 

Catecheses  of  Cyril,  925, 

Ceillier,  passim  in  the  Literature. 

Celibacy  of  the  clergy,  242  f. 

Chams  of  Peter,  443. 

Chalcedon,  council  of  (a.  d.  451),  279, 
348,  351,  740  ff. ;  Creed  of,  744  ff. ; 
Christology  of,  747  ff. 

Chorepiscopoi,  269. 

Christmas,  394  ff. 

Christological  controvensies,  705  ff. 

Ciirysostom,  on  slavery,  118;  against 
extravagance,  127;  on  persecution, 
144 ;  on  monasticism,  169 ;  on  the 
priesthood,  253  ;  on  veracity,  254 ;  on 
the  papacy,  309 ;  on  discipline,  358 ; 
on  the  worship  of  saints  and  rehcs, 
439;  on  the  eucharist,  494,  507,  602; 
liturgy  of,  530 ;  on  hymns,  579 ;  dur- 


ALPHABETICAL   INDEX. 


1031 


ing  the  Origenistic  controversies,  his 
deposition,  exile,  and  death,  702  ff. ; 
his  life  and  writings,  933-941 ;  Jerome 
on  Chrysostom,  982  (note  2). 

Church,  doctrine  of  the,  3G3  ff. 

Church  Year,  386  ff. 

Church  and  State,  union  of,  91  ff. 

CircumeelUons,  362. 

Circumcision,  festival  of,  399. 

Circumincessio,  680,  753. 
'Clement,  liturgy  of,  526. 


Clergy  and  Laity,  238 

Code  of  Theodosius,  110;  of  Justinian, 

110   111.  fP^      a  •      ^aJ^  /LCyril  of  Jerusalem,  on  the  eucba:;st, 

CcELESTius,  791  ff.//'fiygCW^  '^^^^^^493  ;  his  life  and  writmgs,  923-925. 


Comes,  471.  ^"^J^  •  " 

Confessions  of  Augustine,  989,  1005  AT. 

Confirmation,  487  ff. 

Consecration  of  churches,  544  ff. 

CoNSTANTiXE  THE  Great,  his  general  char- 
acter and  position,  12;  his  youth  and 
training,  18;  the  vision  of  the  Cross, 
20 ;  the  edict  of  toleration,  29 ;  his 
public  reign  and  legislation,  31 ;  his 
baptism  and  death,  35,  37  ;  his  merits 
for  the  civil  Svmday,  105 ;  for  the  re- 
moval of  social  evils,  108 ;  on  slavery, 
116 ;  on  gladiatorial  shows,  122 ;  on  the 
relation  between  the  imperial  and  epis- 
copal power,  133;  on  the  persecution 
of  heretics,  139;  presiding  over  the 
council  of  Nicfea,  336 ;  legislation  on 
the  observance  of  Sunday,  379  ff. ; 
building  churches,  542 ;  calhng  the 
council  of  Nicsea,  621;  opening  the 
council,  625  f. 

Constantinople,  foundation  of,  33 ;  patri- 
archal see,  276  ff. 

Constantinopolitan  Council,  L  (a.  d.  381), 

350,  638  ff.,  667  ff. 
Constantinopolitan  Council,  11.  (a.  d.  553), 

351,  770  ff. 
Constantmopolitan  Council,  III  (a.  d.  680) 

and  IV.  (a.d.  869),  352,  771. 
Constantinopolitan  local  Synod  (in  448), 

738. 
Constaxtius,  38,  635. 
Consubstantiality,  654  ff. 
Copts,  776  f. 
CouncUs,  330  ff. 
Creationism  (or  Creatiauism),'  830  ff. 

^  German  divines  uniformly  spell 
Creatia7iismus,  Generatianismus,  Tradu- 
cisinismus,  Preezistentiznumus,  Subordi- 
naHa.nismuS'  (in  the  doctrine  on  the 
Trinity),  ^and  Creatia.ne);^tc.,  after  the 
analogy  'of  Christianism,  Aristotelianism^ 
Sabell^nism,  Arianismy  Pelagianism, 
Nestorianism,  etc.     In  Englis\ these  con- 


Cross,  invention  of  the,  450 ;  use  of,  560 

ff 
Crucifix,  562. 
Crypts,  560. 
Ctesiphox,  794. 
CcxxixGHAM,  on  the  Trinity,  673  (note); 

on  Pelagianism,  815;  on  Augustinian- 

ism,  821  (note);  on  irresistible  grace, 

848  (note). 
Cyril  of  Alexandria,  67,  75,  421,  714 

ff. ;  his  doctrine  of  Christ,  735  ;  views 

on  the  Virgin  Mary,  946  ff. ;  his  life 

and  writings,  942-949. 


D 

Damasus,  pope,  370  ff.,  594,  974. 

Daxiel  the  Stylite,  195. 

Daxte,  on  the  donation  of  Constantlne, 

99. 
Deacons,  259. 
Deaconesses,  259. 
Decretals,  292. 
Demetrias,  791,  794. 
DiDYMus  OF  Alexandria,  his  life   and 

writings,  921-923. 
DiODORUS  OF  Tarsus,  935,  937. 
DiONYSius  Areopagita,  604. 
DioxYSius  ExiGuus,  354. 
DioscuRUS  OF  Alexandria,  736  ff. ;  743  f. 
Diospolis,  synod  of,  796. 
Discipline,  356  ff. 
Domitian,  704. 
Donatists,  145,  360  ff. 

venient  scholastic  terms  are  not  yet  nat- 
uralized, and,  with  the  single  exception  of 
Tradudanistn,  are  not  found  in  Johnson 
and  Richardson,  nor  even  in  the  new 
editions  of  Webster  or  Worcester.  The 
few  modern  English  writers  who  use 
them,  differ;  Dr.  Shedd  (History  of 
Christian  Doctrine,  vol.  ii.  p.  3)  spells 
creationism,  while  the  translator  of 
Hagenbach's  Dogmengeschichte  follows 
the  German  spellmg.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  Tradiicianism  is  the  only 
proper  spelling ;  but  inasmuch  as  the 
English  language  has  the  nouns  creation, 
generation,  subordination,/ifhQVQ  is  some 
reason  for  preferring  creationism,  gciiera- 
tionism,  ,aed*  subordinalionism,  »v:hich 
seem  to  sound  more  natural  to  tiieEng 
lish  ear  than  the  corresponding  German 
terms,  which  are  formed  from  adjectives 
which  are,  not  in  use^e^-" 


yjilo^dj^ 


fTHl^lVW^ 


x^  Jlcl^^t^'^4i^i^^^4^^ 


1032 


ALPHABETICAL    INDEX. 


DoNATCs  THE  Great,  36L 

DoRNER,  on  the  council  of  Chalcedon, 
747  ;  on  the  Christology  of  the  ancient 
church,  759  (note),  760,  and  passim. 

DcpiN,  passim  in  the  Literature  and 
notes. 


E 


Easter,  400  ff. 

Ecce  Homo  picture,  570. 

Ecumenical  bishop,  328  f. 
'.cumenical  councils,  330  ff.,  723. 
jlessa,  237,  951. 
llectiou  of  the  clergy,  239. 

Election,  doctrine  of,  850  ff. 

Elevation  of  the  Holy  Cross,  455. 

Ephesus,  ecumenical  council  of  (a.  d. 
431),  348,  350,  722  ff.,  SOI. 

Ephesus,  heretical  council  of  (a.  d.  449), 
see  Robber  Council. 

EPHRiEM,  or  Ephraim,  the  Syrian,  on 
Mariolatry,  422,  953;  on  hagiolatry, 
438 ;  as  a  hymn  writer,  580 ;  his  life 
and  works,  949-954. 

EpiPHANirs,  on  Mariolatry,  417;  against 
images,  566 ;  against  Origen,  700  ff. ; 
against  Apollinarianism,  711 ;  his  life 
and  writings,  926-933. 

Epiphany,  399. 

EpitracheUon,  535. 

Episcopal  jurisdiction,  102. 

Episcopal  intercession,  103. 

Erasmus,  on  Jerome,  206 ;  on  Augustine, 
1002. 

Essence,  Divine,  as  distinct  from  hypos- 
tasis or  subsistence,  672. 

Eucharist,  sacrament  of  the,  491 ;  sacri- 
fice of,  502;  celebration  of,  511. 

Euchites,  199. 

EcDOxiA,  704,  936,  938. 

EuDoxius  OF  Antioch,  637. 

EuNAPius,  79. 

EuNOMius,  EuNOMiAxs,  637,  646. 

EusEBius  OF  Cj:sarea,  82,  130;  on  im- 
ages, 565  f. ;  at  the  council  of  Nicoea, 
626,  628;  his  life  and  writings,  871 
ff 

EuSEBItJS  OF  DORYL^UM,  738. 

EcsEBius  OF  Emisa,  872. 

EcsEBirs  OF  NicoMEDiA,  627,  629,  633 

ff. 

Eustathians,  199. 
ECTYOHES,  736  ff, 
Eutychianism  and  Eutychiau  controversy, 

734  ff. 
EvAGRics,  882. 
Exorcism,  486,  925. 


F 


Fabricius,  J.  A.,  passim  in  the  Literar 

ture  and  notes. 
Facundus,  500,  770,  996. 
Fall,  doctrine  of  the,  805  ff.,  824  ff. 
Family,  112. 

Faustus  of  Ehegium,  863. 
Felix  L,  pope,  324,  371. 
Felix  II.,  pope,  636. 
Felix  III.,  pope,  326. 
Filioque,  687  f. 

FLA.VIAN  OF.  Constantinople,  737. 
FoRTUNATifs;*5g5'ff,  .. 
Freedom,  doctrine  of,  802  ff. 
Fulgentius  op  Ruspe,  866,  996. 

FtTLGENTIUS  FeRRANDUS,  996. 


G 

Gallican  Liturgy,  531. 

Gangauf,  on  St.  Augustine,  989,  998, 
1002. 

Gelasius  I.,  pope,  324 ;  on  the  eucharist, 
498  ;  on  Semi-Pelagianism,  866. 

Generation,  eternal  of  the  Son,  658  f. 

Generationism  (or  in  the  German  way  of 
spelling,  Generatianism),  830  ff. 

Gennadius,  863,  884,  982. 

Genseric,  322,  641. 

George,  St.,  888  (note). 

Gibbon,  on  Constantino  the  Great,  18; 
on  Julian,  51 ;  on  the  downfall  of  the 
Roman  empire,  74  ;  on  the  persecution 
of  heretics,  143 ;  on  Athanasius,  889  ; 
on  Gregory  Nazianzen,  909,  914,  915 
(notes) ;  on  Jerome,  982 ;  on  Hippo, 
992  ;  on  Augustine,  1001, 1023  (notes). 

GiESELER,  passim  in  the  Literature  and 
notes. 

Gladiatorial  games,  122. 

Gloria  in  excelsis,  578, 

Good  Friday,  402. 

Grace,  doctrine  of,  812  ff.,  843  ff. 

Gratian,  62. 

Gregory  Nazianzen,  against  extrava- 
gance and  luxury,  127  ;  on  the  minis- 
try, 251 ;  on  synods,  347 ;  on  baptism, 
481 ;  on  the  eucharist,  496 ;  as  a 
hymn-writer,  579,  581,  921 ;  at  Con- 
stantinople, 638,  917  f . ;  on  the  Holy 
Ghost,  664  f. ;  friendship  with  Basil, 
895,  914;  his  life  and  writings,  908- 
921. 

Gregory  op  Nyssa,  on  the  worship  of 
saints,  438 ;  on  pilgrimages,  467 ;  on 
baptism,  481 ;  against  Arianism,  638; 


^  M 


ALPHABETICAI.   INDEX. 


103J 


on  the  Holy  Ghost,  6G5  ;  on  the  Trini- 
ty, 671  ;  his  life  and  writings,  903- 
908. 

Gregory  I.,  pope,  328  f.,  870. 

Gregory  Illttminator,  779. 

Gregory  of  Cappadocia,  888  (note). 

Gcizot,  on  the  church  and  civilization, 
1025. 

H 

Hase,  179 ;  on  Gregory  Nazianzen,  909  ; 
on  Chrysostom,  938  (note). 

Hasse,  on  the  Christology  of  Chalcedon, 
760. 

Helena,  19,  467. 

Helvidics,  231  f. 

Henoticon,  765. 

Hereseologues,  929  fF. 

Heretical  baptism,  484. 

HiEROSYiics,  see  Jerome. 

HiLAKirs  OF  Arles,  296  flp. 

HiLARius  OF  Poitiers,  his  hymns,  589 ;  on 
the  Holy  Ghost,  664 ;  his  life  and  writ- 
ings, 959-961. 

HiLARius,  pope,  323. 

HiLARirs,  deacon  of  Rome,  965. 

Hippo,  council  of,  609. 

Hippo-Bona,  993,  997. 

Holy  Ghost,  doctrine  of,  663  £f. 

Homoousion,  654  ff.,  672  ff.,  745. 

HoxoRius,  66. 

Hooker,  R.,  on  the  Trinity,  673 ;  on  the 
incarnation,  752,  756  (notes). 

Hormisdas,  pope,  325. 

Hosius  OF  Cordova,  627,  635,  636. 

HcBER,  on  St.  Augustme,  832  f.,  1002, 
1011  (notes). 

Humboldt,  Alexander  von,  on  the  Nes- 
torians  and  their  influence  upon  physi- 
cal sciences  in  the  East,  7,31  f. ;  on  St. 
Basil's  descriptions  of  the  beauties  of 
nature,  896,  900. 

Hymns,  hymnology,  576  fF. 

Hypatia,  67,  943. 

Hypostasis,  675  ff. 


Ibas  of  Edessa,  729,  735,  746,  769. 

Idiotes,  679. 

Images,  of  Christ,  563  ff. ;  of  the  Virgin 

Mary,  the  apostles  and  saints,  571  ff. 
Incarnation,  true  doctrine  of,  750. 
Infant  baptism,  483,  834  ff. 
Infanticide,  114. 


Innocent  I.,  797,  940. 
Innocents,  festival  of  the,  398. 
Invention  of  the  Cross,  450. 
Isidore  of  Pelusium,  198,  941. 


Jacob  Baradai,  775. 

Jacob  of  Nisibis,  626. 

Jacobites,  775  f. 

James,  liturgy  of,  527. 

Jerome,  his  life  and  writings,  205  ff.  and 
967  ff. ;  on  the  clergy,  252 ;  on  veraci- 
ty, 255 ;  on  the  papacy,  304 ;  on  the 
worship  of  saints,  440 ;  on  pilgrimages, 
468;  agamst  Origen,  701  ff.,  971; 
against  Pelagianism,  794  ff. ;  on  uni- 
versal sinfulness,  807  ;  on  Epiphanius, 
928  ;  relation  to  Augustine,  972  ;  as  a 
divine  and  scholar,  967  ff. ;  his  works, 
972  ff. 

Jerusalem,  patriarchate  of,  283 ;  synod 
of,  795. 

John  the  Baptist,  festival  of,  443  f. 

John,  the  Evangelist,  festival  of,  398. 

John,  bishop  of  Antioch,  722,  724,  725, 
735. 

John,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  701,  795. 

John  Chrysostom,  see  Chrysostom. 

John  of  Damascus,  on  Christ's  personal 
appearance,  571 ;  on  the  anhypostasia 
of  Christ's  humanity,  757  f. 

John  Scholasticus,  335. 

Jovian,  60. 

JoviNiAN,  227  ff.,  984. 

Julian  the  Apostate,  41 ;  his  education, 
42 ;  his  religion  and  moral  character, 
43 ;  his  reign,  45 ;  his  attempted  ref- 
ormation of  heathenism,  47 ;  his  at- 
tempted suppression  of  Christianity, 
50;  his  toleration,  51;  his  partiality 
and  injustice,  52 ;  prohibition  of  Chris- 
tian schools  of  learning,  53  ;  treatment 
of  the  Jews,  54 ;  vain  attempt  to  re- 
build the  temple  of  Jerusalem,  55  ;  his 
death,  57 ;  failure  of  his  reign,  59  ;  his 
attack  upon  Christianity,  75  ;  his  testi- 
mony for  the  Gospel  history,  77. 

Julian  of  Eclanum,  800,  837  f.,  937, 
and  passim. 

Julianists,  766. 

Justin  IL,  772. 

JUSTINA,  136. 

Justinian  L,  68,  110,  135,  768  ff. 
Justinian  Code,  110,  115,  etc. 
Juvenal,  765. 
Juvencus,  598. 


1034 


ALPHABETICAL   ESTDEX. 


K 

Kahnis,  on  the  Creed  of  Chalcedon,  74*7. 
Kenosis,  761. 

Kenosists,  or  Kenotics,  761, 
KtistolatrcB,  767. 


Lactantius,  82,  and  passim  ;  his  life  and 
works,  955-958. 

Latin  patriarchate,  288  ff. 

Lee,  Samuel,  on  Eusebius,  874,  878. 

Legislation,  influence  of  Christianity  on, 
107. 

Leibnitz,  on  St.  Augustine,  1002  (note). 

Leo  the  Great,  on  persecution,  145 ;  on 
the  council  of  Chalcedon,  282;  his 
controversy  with  Hilarius  of  Aries, 
296  ;  his  life  and  reign,  314  fif. ;  on  the 
worship  of  saints,  442 ;  on  the  eucha- 
rist,  500;  on  the  Robber  synod,  739; 
during  the  Christological  conflict,  740  ; 
at  the  council  of  Chalcedon,  744  ff. ; 
on  Seini-Pelagiauism,  864  f. 

Leontius,  on  images,  568. 

LiBANics,  40,  61,  64,  80,  81,  934. 

Liberatus,  996. 

LiBERius,  pope,  371,  635  f. 

Liturgies,  517  ff. 

Longobards,  641. 

Lord's  Supper,  see  Eucharist. 

Lucifer,  bishop  of  Calaris,  983. 

Luciferians,  983. 

Luther,  on  Jerome,  214,  973  ;  on  Augus- 
tine, 1022  f. ;  on  predestination,  1023 
(notes). 


M 

Macarius,  on  the  eucharist,  497. 

Macedonians,  639,  664. 

Macedonius,  663. 

Macrina,  905. 

Madonna  pictures,  671. 

Malchus,  mouk,  982. 

Manichaaism,  1012,  1017,  and  passim. 

Manuscripts  of  the  Bible,  610  f. 

Marcella,  395,  962. 

Marcellinus,  Ammianus,  79,  and  often. 

Marcellus,  651  ff. 

Marcian,  emperor,  741. 

Majiius  Mercator,  714,  716,  784,  793, 

800. 
Mariolatry,  422  ff.,  946  f. 


Mariology,  409  ff. 

Mark,  liturgy  of,  529. 

Maronites,.  792  f. 

Marriage,  112,  242. 

Martin  op  Tours,  202  ff. 

Martyrology,  446. 

Martyrs  and  Saints,  worship  of,  428  ff. 

Mary,  the  Virgin,  doctrine  and  worship 

of,  409  ff. ;  festivals  of,  425  ff. ;  mother 

of  God,  716  ff. ;  free  from  sm,  807. 
Mass,  504,  511,  522.  . 

MassUians,  859.  ;  •o  I 

Maternus,  Julius  Firmicus,  84.  / 

Maundy  Thursday,  402. 
Maurus,  225. 

Meletius  of  Antioch,  372,  934. 
Memnon  of  Ephesus,  723,  726. 
Mensea,  446. 
Menologia,  446. 
Mesrop,  779. 
MessaUans,  199. 
Metropolitans,  270. 
Michael,  archangel,  festival  of,  444. 
MiGNE,  often  in  the  Literature,  especially 

ch.  X. 
Milan,  archbishop  of,  293. 
Milman,  on  the  court  of  Arcadius,  129  ; 

on  ecumenical  councils,  723 ;  on  Cyril 

of  Alexandria,  945,  and  passim. 
Miracles  of  the  Nicene  age,  460  ff. 
Missa,  504,  511,  622. 
Missale  Romanum,  535. 
Monasticism,  147  ff. 
MoNGUS,  Peter,  765. 
Monica,  or  Monxica,  990,  991. 
Monophysites  and  Monophysitism,  762  ff. 
Monothehtism,  752  f.,  782. 

MONTALEMBERT,   148,  211,  214. 

MoNTFAUCON,    689,    699,    884,    933,  and 

passim. 
Monte  Cassino,  218. 
Moses  Chorenensis,  779. 
Mozarabic  liturgy,  632. 


N 

Nativity  of  Mary,  427. 
Natures  in  Christ,  751  f.,  753. 
Neander,  on  persecution,  145;  on  Pela- 

gianism,  815;  on  Augustine,  842;  on 

Chrysostom,  933,  938. 
Nectarius,  357. 
Nepotian,  986. 
Nestorianism,  714  ff. 
Nestorians,  729  ff. 
Nestorius,  715   ff. ;    his  condemnation, 

724  ;  death  and  character,  728  f. 
Newman,  John  H.,  214,  948,  1017. 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX. 


1035 


New  Platonism,  42  f.,  68,  80. 
New  Year,  399. 

Nicaea,  or  Nice,  council  of,  349,  352,  622 
ff. 

Nicene  Creed,  629,  631,  667  ff. 
NiCEPnoRUS  Callisti,  883. 
NiEDNER,  on  Clirysostom,  937,  and  pas- 
sim. 
NiLus  OP  Sinai,  198,  941. 
NiOBES,  Stephancs,  767. 
Nisibis,  237. 
Nomocanon,  355. 
NONXA,  910. 

NouRRissoN,  on  St.  Augustine,  989,  1003, 
1006,  1008,  1018,  1123  (notes). 


o 

Odoacer,  69,  323. 

(Ecumenical,  see  Ecumeuical. 

Oltmpias,  261. 

Optatus  of  Milevi,  on  the  papacy,  303. 

Orange,  synod  of,  866  S". 

Orarion,  535. 

Ordination,  489  ff. 

Orestes,  943. 

Origen,  doctrine  of  Christ,  619  f . ;  on 

the  origm  of  the  soul,  831;  872,  875, 

879,  978. 
Origenistic   controversies,    698   ff.,   769, 

771,  971. 
Original  sin,  829  ff.,  833  ff. 
Orosics,  So,  795. 
Osirs  (or  Kosius)  of  Cordova,  627,  628, 

635,  630. 
Owen,  John,  on  the  Person  of  Christ, 

756  (note). 
OzANAii,  on  Jerome,  968. 


Faciiomius,  195. 

Paganism,  origin  of  the  word,  61 ;  ex- 
tinction of,  07. 
Painting,  567. 
Pallium,  265. 
Palm  Simday,  402. 
Pamprilcs,  872. 
Panarium  of  Epiphanius,  920  f. 
Papacy,  299  ff. 

Paphnutius,  on  celibacy,  244,  626. 
Parabolani,  263. 
Paschal  controversies,  404  ff. 
Passion  week,  402. 
Patron  saints,  430. 
Patriarchs,  271  ff. 


Patriarchs  of  old  and  new  Rome,  284  ff. 

Paul  of  Thebes,  179  f. 

Paula,  St.,  214  ff. 

Paulinus  of  Antioch,  373. 

Paulinus  of  Milan,  792,  961,  964,  967. 

Paulinus  of  Nola,  442,  568,  598. 

Paulcs  Orosius,  795,  884. 

Pelagianism,  785  ff. 

Pelagius,  on  Mariology,  419 ;  his  hfe 
and  system,  790  ff. 

Pelagius  I.,  pope,  327,  772. 

Pelagius  II.,  pope,  328. 

Pentecost,  407  ff. 

Pericopes,  470. 

nepi;^£ip7)(ris,  680,  753. 

Persecution  of  heretics,  138. 

Person,  in  the  Holy  Trinity,  675  ff. ;  of 
Christ,  754  ff. 

Petavius,  on  the  Trinity,  616,  676,  and 
passim;  on  Christology,  757,  and  pas- 
sim. 

Peter,  festival  of,  443. 

Peter  and  Paul,  festival  of,  443. 

Peter  the  Fuller,  765. 

Phantasiastse,  766. 

Phelonion,  535. 

Philastrus,  or  Philastrius,  931. 

Philopatris,  79. 

Philoponus,  John,  674,  767. 

Philippopolis,  council  of,  635. 

Philosophy  of  the  fathers,  604  ff. 

Philostorgius,  629,  883. 

Phocas,  431,  440. 

Photinus,  651  ff. 

Phthartolaters,  766. 

PilgrimageSj  466. 

Plato,  on  the  origin  of  the  soul,  831, 
1009,  and  passim. 

Platonism,  604,  991,  1009. 

Pneumatomachians,  639,  664. 

Poetry,  576. 

Politics  and  religion,  131. 

PossiDius,  989,  994. 

POTAMON,  873. 

Prasdestinatus,  863  f.,  932. 

Predestination,  doctrine  of,  850  ff. 

Preexistentianism,  831  ff. 

Presbyters,  258. 

Presentation  of  Mary,  427. 

Priscilhanists,  143,  1013. 

Procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  686  fi. 

Processions,  465. 

Proclus,  79. 

Proclus  of  Gtzicum,  720  f. 

Propriety  (proprietas),  679. 

Prosper  Aquitaxcs,  859  ff.,  862,  981. 

Prothesis,  551. 

Prudentius,  on  the  worship  of  saints, 
441  ;  his  hymns,  594  ff. 

Pseudo-Dionvsius,  604. 


1036 


ALPHABETICAL   INDEX. 


PcBLius  Lestulus,  description  of  Christ's 

personal  appearance,  570. 
PuLCHERiA,  empress,  741. 
Purification  of  Mary,  423. 


Q 

Quadragesima,  400. 
Quatember,  490. 

QuESXEL,  296  (note),  and  passim. 
Quinisexta,  352,  355. 

QUODTULTDEUS,  931. 


R 

Ravenna,  274 ;  bishop  of,  293  f. 
ReUcs,  worship  of,  449  ff. 
Resurrection  of  the  body,  451. 
Retractations  of  Augustine,  1004,  1007.^ 
Rhyme,  587. 

Robber  Council  at  Ephesus,  348,  738  £f. 
Roman  Uturgy,  534. 
ROSWETD,  448. 

RuFiNus,  701,  884,  984  (note). 


s 


Sabbath,  the  Christian,  378  ff. 

Sabellianism,  651  ff. 

Sacraments,  doctrine  of  the,  474  ff. 

Sacrifice  of  the  Mass,  502  ff. 

Salvator  picture,  569. 

Saltiaxus,  on  the  moral  condition  of  the 

Christian  Church  towards  the  middle 

of  the  fifth  century,  88,  126  ft'. 
Samts,  worship  of,  428  ff. 
Sardica,  council  of,  310  ff.,  634. 
Sasima,  914. 
Schleieruacher's       Christology,      757 

(note). 
ScHRocKH,  passim  in  the  Literature  and 

notes. 
Scripture,   reading  of  the,  470  ff. ;    the 

rule  of  faith,  606  ff. 
Secretaries,  263. 

Secularization  of  the  Church,  125. 
Semi-Augustinianism,  866  ff. 
Semi-Arianism,  635  ff. 
Semi-Pelagianism    and    Semi-Pelagians, 

857  ff. 
Serapeion,  destruction  of,  65. 
Sermons,  472  ff.,  649  ff. 
Severians,  766. 
Suedd,   on   the   Trinity,   674,   and    676 


(notes);  on  Christology,  755  f.,  760 
(note) ;  on  Augustine's  doctrine  of  sin, 
821  (note);  on  irresistible  grace,  848 
f.  (note) ;  on  Augustine's  Confessions, 
1005  (note). 

SiMPLicius,  pope,  323. 

Sin,  doctrine  of,  829  ff. 

SiRicius,  decree  on  the  celibacy  of  the 
clergy,  247,  292. 

Sirmium,  637. 

Slavery,  115. 

Socrates,  the  historian,  880,  and  passim, 

Sophia,  St.,  557. 

SozoMEN,  881,  and  passim. 

Spanish  liturgy,  532. 

Sptridio.v,  626,  631. 

Stephen,  St.,  festival  of,  398 ;  relics  of, 
459. 

Stewards,  262. 

Sticharion,  535. 

Subordinationism  (or  subordinatianism ') 
of  the  Nicene  fathers,  681-683. 

SuLPi^ius  Severus,  20^,  884. 

Sunday,  legal  sanction  ^d  observance  of, 
105,  378  ff.  ^ 

Support  of  the  clergy,  100. 

Symeon  the  Sttlite,  192  ff. 

Symmachus,  61,  62,  64,  80,  963. 

Symmachus,  pope,  324. 

Syxesics,  604  f. 

Synodus  palmaris,  325. 


T 


Tall  brethren,  700. 

Tedeum,  578,  592. 

Telemachus,  122. 

Tertulliax,  on  traducianism,  830. 

Ter  Sanctus,  578. 

Themistians,  767. 

Themistius,  80. 

Themistius,  the  Monophysite,  767. 

Theodora,  136,  769  ff. 

Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  707,  717,  718 
f.,  729,  769,  770,  800,  881,  935,  937. 

Theodoret,  on  the  papacy,  309 ;  on  the 
eucharist,  497 ;  on  the  person  of  Christ, 
727,  735,  737  ;  condemned  in  the 
Three  Chapter  controversy,  769  ff.  ; 
his  hfe  and  writings,  881. 

Theodoric,  69,  324  ff.,  641. 

Theodorus  Askidas,  704,  771. 

Theodores  Lector,  883. 

Theodosians,  767. 

TheodoSius  L,  or  the  Great,  his  charac- 

'  See  the  note  sub  v.  crcationhm  or 
creatianism,  p.  1031. 


ALPHABETICAL   INDEX. 


1037 


ter  and  reign,  63 ;  laws  against  idola- 
try, 65 :  his  code,  110 ;  his  laws  agamst 
heretics,  141 ;  submits  to  discipline, 
359  ;  calls  the  second  ecumenical  coun- 
cil, 638  ;  relation  to  Ambrose,  963. 

Thkodosius  II.,  66,  68,  722,  800. 

Theodosius,  the  Monophysite,  765. 

Theopaschitcs,  763. 

THEOPiiiLts,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  65, 
702  ff.,  936. 

Theotokos,  716  if.,  745. 

Thomas  Christians,  733. 

Three  Chapter  controversy,  768  if. 

TiLLEMONT,  often  (in  the  Literature  and 
notes). 

Tradition,  606  ff. 

Traducianism,  830. 

Triboniancs,  110. 

Trinitarian  controversies,  616  ff. 

Trinitv,  Nicene  doctrine  of,  670  ff. 

Trisag"ion,  763. 

Tritheism,  674. 

TruUan  Council  (692),  246. 

Tychonius,  369  f. 


u 

Ulfilas,  641. 

Ullmann,  on   Gregory  Nazianzen,  908, 

910. 
Uksixus,  370  fiP. 


Valens,  60  f.,  638. 
Valextinian  I.,  60. 
Valentiniax  II.,  62. 


Valentinian  ni.,  66. 
Veronica,  570. 
Victoria,  altar  of,  62. 
ViGILANTIUS,  232  f. 

ViGinus,  pope,  769  ff. 

ViGiLius  OF  Tapsus,  996. 

Vixcextius  Lirixexsis,  on  progress  in 
Christian  knowledge,  344 ;  on  the  rule 
of  faith,  613  f. ;  on  Semi-Pclagianism, 
862  f. 

Vulgate,  611,  972  flP. 


w 

Walch,  945,  and  passim. 

Waterlaxd,  on  the  eternal  generation, 
658  ;  on  the  Trinity,/6^3  ;  on  the 
double  procession  of  tne  Holy  Spirit, 
687 ;  on  the  Athanasian  Creed,  696. 

Westminster  standards,  on  Christology, 
748. 

Wiggers,  on  the  Pelagian  controversy, 
783  ff.,  852  (note). 

Woman,  elevation  of,  112. 


C/n 


X 


Xenajas,  766. 


Zeno,  765. 

Zockler,  on  Jerome,  968,  973,  988. 

ZosiMcs,  pope,  67,  79,  294,  295,  797  ff. 


J^mmC!^0/^^r-,^rM^/^r 


<wQ'nrN 


nr\A'F"-'-,'U' 


^ 


i/^    ■"■'/-\c     .'^^ 


~;^^^/ 


nnR 


^^^^^A/^nnnnWA/^3-5^8AH/^' 


<.ArS 


rvr^r^rs'Or^A' 


-,&.  ?^fe\^^ 


,  j^ '  ^^i^- *  ,-^*^i ' 


yn;. 


^a'^':^ 


h^A 


fetei 


'nhn{ 


;^.^A/^Ahnm^^i^^ 


U^ob^S^O^^' 


-^P1 


^/^ob*" 


:^(-\rsr^'-^'^.'-^^  r< 


''d^mm 


^.  »r^ 


f<f^rff 


K/^ 


V_vj-_^;^'    \r\^ 


\fsf^f^. 


,^/^,rN,r^' 


XlI 


^P*^^, 


r;=  -';;^'  ^  §  S;'>>rT^'P^^J^> 


rr^ 


^^^105? 


^rtf 


^r\r^ 


/^/^A^  n, 


'.^ 


^^"?  ^^  ^ 


^^^ 


^1 


,/^/C\/!^ 


f^Oiy^:iiQr 


!.«;- 


^  1' 


'^m^' 


,%«9-. 


J>1'^v,*»'<^,;.- 


i^aJ^, 


!M§rf''-' 


^.^/^A^'^''0, 


